MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086554042 · doi:10.1038/npre.2009.3665.1

Five years of winter climate change-related research in the Canadian low Arctic: What have we learned?

2009· preprint· en· W2086554042 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul Grogan, Kate M. Buckeridge

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Precedings · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraBiogeochemical cycleBiogeochemistryEnvironmental scienceEcosystemClimate changeGrowing seasonArcticSpring (device)SnowTerrestrial ecosystemPhysical geographyVegetation (pathology)EcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The importance of the fall, winter and spring periods to ecosystem functioning and biogeochemical cycling in tundra has only become apparent in the past two decades. Our research group has been conducting winter climate change-related studies at a low arctic tundra site near Daring Lake, north of Yellowknife in northern Canada for the past five years. Most of these studies have focused on the biogeochemical interactions between plants, soils, and soil microbes during fall, winter and spring, and on their responses to experimentally deepened snow. In addition, we have measured trace gas production and isotopic nitrogen tracer distributions among plant and soil components in several vegetation-types. The central goal has been to understand the potential importance of cold season soil N transformation processes to ecosystem-level biogeochemistry during the subsequent plant growing season, and then to develop predictions of how changes in winter climate may impact these seasonal processes. In this talk, I will present a synthesis of those studies, emphasizing temperature-moisture interactions, and highlighting future research priorities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature PrecedingsSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207