MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2105516565 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2011-0504

A California Current bomb radiocarbon reference chronology and petrale sole (<i>Eopsetta jordani</i>) age validation

2013· article· en· W2105516565 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Melissa A. Haltuch, Owen S. Hamel, Kevin R. Piner, Patrick J. McDonald, Craig R. Kastelle, John C. Field

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiocarbon datingChronologyUpwellingAccelerator mass spectrometryCurrent (fluid)Environmental scienceGeologyOceanographyPhysical geographyGeographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As petrale sole (Eopsetta jordani) is a valuable groundfish harvested in the California Current, proper ageing is important for its assessment and management. This study presents the first bomb radiocarbon reference chronology for the California Current and petrale sole age validation. Break-and-burn and surface ages are negatively biased by approximately 1 year and 2–3 years, respectively. The reference and validation curves are more variable and show a lag in the rate of radiocarbon increase in comparison to most other time series of bomb radiocarbon in marine systems. Upwelling in the California Current produces a lagged rate of increase in radiocarbon levels owing to the introduction and mixing of radiocarbon-depleted deep waters with surface waters that interact with the atmosphere. The variable and lagged rate of radiocarbon increase in the petrale sole data may be due to their spending a substantial portion of their first year of life in areas subject to variable upwelling, illustrating the importance of using reference curves for age validation that are region and species specific when possible.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→