Distribution, abundance and size of <i>Lophelia pertusa</i> coral reefs in mid-Norway in relation to seabed characteristics
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
This paper presents results on the distribution, abundance, and size of Lophelia pertusa coral reefs in mid-Norway (62°30&;–65°30&;N) as compiled from own investigations, earlier scientific reports, reports from fishery surveys and fishermen. Detailed bathymetrical mapping covering an area of ∼600 km 2 along the Halten gas-pipeline, and two nearby areas across the shelf revealed 70 Lophelia reefs. In general, the reefs occurred close to breaks and escarpments. High densities of up to nine reefs per km 2 were found in areas with a rugged seabed topography and with a slope >0·6°. These seabed features have probably positive influence on the transport and concentration of food particles and thus control the local distribution of Lophelia . The area covered by individual reefs varied between 1230 m 2 and 37,310 m 2 with a mean of 5628 m 2 . The height of the reefs was positively correlated with the area. Reefs <10,000 m 2 had a circular outline, while larger reefs were elongate, aligned parallel to the depth contours. Along the pipeline the average density of Lophelia reefs was 0·09 km −2 which indicates that the total number of reefs is ∼6300, covering ∼35 km 2 within the whole study area.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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