MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131867119 · doi:10.5194/os-11-175-2015

A wind-driven nonseasonal barotropic fluctuation of the Canadian inland seas

2015· article· en· W2131867119 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher G. Piecuch, Rui M. Ponte

Bibliographic record

VenueOcean science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBarotropic fluidBayWind stressClimatologyOceanographyGeologyTide gaugeClockwiseNorth Atlantic oscillationOcean currentMode (computer interface)Sea levelRotation (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. A wind-driven, spatially coherent mode of nonseasonal, depth-independent variability in the Canadian inland seas (i.e., the collective of Hudson Bay, James Bay, and Foxe Basin) is identified based on Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) retrievals, a tide-gauge record, and a barotropic model over 2003–2013. This dominant mode of nonseasonal variability is correlated with the North Atlantic Oscillation and is associated with net flows into and out of the Canadian inland seas; the anomalous inflows and outflows, which are reflected in mean sea level and bottom pressure changes, are driven by wind stress anomalies over Hudson Strait, probably related to wind setup, as well as over the northern North Atlantic Ocean, possibly mediated by various wave mechanisms. The mode is also associated with mass redistribution within the Canadian inland seas, reflecting linear response to local wind stress variations under the combined influences of rotation, gravity, and variable bottom topography. Results exemplify the usefulness of GRACE for studying regional ocean circulation and climate.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOcean scienceSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207