MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2165838966 · doi:10.5194/bgd-6-2939-2009

Carbon dioxide and methane annual emissions from two boreal reservoirs and nearby lakes in Quebec, Canada

2009· article· en· W2165838966 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Demarty, Julie Bastien, A. Tremblay

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceCarbon dioxideGreenhouse gasMethaneAtmospheric sciencesSpring (device)BorealClimatologyHydrology (agriculture)Physical geographyOceanographyGeologyGeographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The results of dissolved GHG (CO2 and CH4) measurement campaigns carried out in Quebec (Canada) during the open-water periods and under-ice in a newly created reservoir (Eastmain 1), a 25 year old reservoir (Robert-Bourassa) and in three reference lakes are presented. While CO2 partial pressures varied with season with a net increase under the ice cover, CH4 partial pressures did not. We were able to extrapolate the highest CO2 partial pressures reached in the different studied systems just before ice break-up with high spring emission period. We then estimated the springtime CO2 fluxes and compared them to annual CO2 fluxes and GHG fluxes. Thus we clearly demonstrated that in our systems CH4 fluxes was of minor importance in the GHG emissions, CO2 fluxes representing around 90% of the annual fluxes. We also pointed out the importance of springtime emissions in the annual budget.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→