New grid of Arctic bathymetry aids scientists and mapmakers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For over two decades, Sheet 5.17 of the Fifth Edition of the General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (GEBCO) [Canadian Hydrographic Service, 1979] has been considered the authoritative portrayal of the sea floor north of 64 N.This sheet was constructed from publicly available bathymetric data sets, which in the late 1970s were rather sparse, consisting almost entirely of underway measurements collected from ice‐breakers, drifting ice islands, and point measurements obtained along snow‐mobile tracks or using air support. Data coverage tended to be fairly good at lower latitudes where ice cover was not a hindrance, but at higher latitudes, where ice was more prevalent, major features such as the Amerasian and Eurasian Basins were not well delineated. This situation posed problems not only for expedition planners but also for scientific investigators, who needed an accurate description of the sea floor to design field experiments and to link their research with processes affecting or affected by the shape of the seabed (for example, sea level change, ocean circulation, sediment transport,seafloor spreading, and Pleistocene glaciation).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.048 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".