MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122522104 · doi:10.1029/2010jc006539

Observations of the sensitivity of beam attenuation to particle size in a coastal bottom boundary layer

2011· article· en· W2122522104 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

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlingParticle sizeAttenuationParticle-size distributionEnvironmental scienceMineralogyMaterials scienceOpticsPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to test the hypothesis that the aggregated state of natural marine particles constrains the sensitivity of optical beam attenuation to particle size. An instrumented bottom tripod was deployed at the 12-m node of the Martha's Vineyard Coastal Observatory to monitor particle size distributions, particle size-versus-settling-velocity relationships, and the beam attenuation coefficient (c(p)) in the bottom boundary layer in September 2007. An automated in situ filtration system on the tripod collected 24 direct estimates of suspended particulate mass (SPM) during each of five deployments. On a sampling interval of 5 min, data from a Sequoia Scientific LISST 100x Type B were merged with data from a digital floc camera to generate suspended particle volume size distributions spanning diameters from approximately 2 mu m to 4 cm. Diameter-dependent densities were calculated from size-versus-settling-velocity data, allowing conversion of the volume size distributions to mass distributions, which were used to estimate SPM every 5 min. Estimated SPM and measured c(p) from the LISST 100x were linearly correlated throughout the experiment, despite wide variations in particle size. The slope of the line, which is the ratio of c(p) to SPM, was 0.22 g m(-2). Individual estimates of c(p):SPM were between 0.2 and 0.4 g m(-2) for volumetric median particle diameters ranging from 10 to 150 mu m. The wide range of values in c(p):SPM in the literature likely results from three factors capable of producing factor-of-two variability in the ratio: particle size, particle composition, and the finite acceptance angle of commercial beam-transmissometers.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.228 · 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