MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103165697 · doi:10.1029/2012gl051886

Lake‐size dependency of wind shear and convection as controls on gas exchange

2012· article· en· W2103165697 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind shearConvectionTurbulenceAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceGeologyMixed layerShear (geology)Wind speedHydrology (agriculture)ClimatologyMeteorologyOceanographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High‐frequency physical observations from 40 temperate lakes were used to examine the relative contributions of wind shear ( u * ) and convection ( w * ) to turbulence in the surface mixed layer. Seasonal patterns of u * and w * were dissimilar; u * was often highest in the spring, while w * increased throughout the summer to a maximum in early fall. Convection was a larger mixed‐layer turbulence source than wind shear ( u * / w * < 0.75) for 18 of the 40 lakes, including all 11 lakes <10 ha. As a consequence, the relative contribution of convection to the gas transfer velocity ( k , estimated by the surface renewal model) was greater for small lakes. The average k was 0.54 m day −1 for lakes <10 ha. Because u * and w * differ in temporal pattern and magnitude across lakes, both convection and wind shear should be considered in future formulations of lake‐air gas exchange, especially for small lakes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.249 · 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