Seasonal versus synoptic variability in planktonic production in a high‐latitude marginal sea: The Gulf of St. Lawrence (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Gulf of St. Lawrence (Canada) is a subarctic marginal sea characterized by highly variable hydrodynamic conditions that generate a spatial heterogeneity in the marine production. A better understanding of physical‐biological linkages is needed to improve our ability to evaluate the effects of climate variability and change on the gulf's planktonic production. We develop a three‐dimensional (3‐D) eddy permitting resolution physical‐biological coupled model of plankton dynamics in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The planktonic ecosystem model accounts for the competition between simplified herbivorous and microbial food webs that characterize bloom and post‐bloom conditions, respectively, as generally observed in temperate and subarctic coastal waters. It is driven by a fully prognostic 3‐D sea ice‐ocean model with realistic tidal, atmospheric, and hydrological forcing. The simulation shows a consistent seasonal primary production cycle, and highlights the importance of local sea ice dynamics for the timing of the vernal bloom and the strong influence of the mesoscale circulation on planktonic production patterns at subregional 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".