An overview of seabed-mapping technologies in the context of marine habitat classification☆
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A wide range of seabed-mapping technologies is reviewed in respect to their effectiveness in discriminating benthic habitats at different spatial scales. Of the seabed attributes considered important in controlling the benthic community of marine sands and gravel, sediment grain size, porosity or shear strength, and sediment dynamics were highlighted as the most important. Whilst no one mapping system can quantify all these attributes at the same time, some may be estimated by skilful interpretation of the remotely sensed data. For example, seabed processes or features, such as bedform migration, scour, slope failure, and gas venting are readily detectable by many of the mapping systems, and these characteristics in turn can be used to assist a habitat classification (and monitoring) of the seabed. We tabulate the relationship between “rapid” continental shelf sedimentological processes, the seabed attributes affecting these processes, and the most suitable mapping system to employ for their detection at different spatial scales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it