MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Response to technical comment on `meta‐analysis reveals negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine organisms'

2011· letter· en· W2165873936 on OpenAlexaff
Kristy J. Kroeker, Rebecca L. Kordas, Ryan Crim, Gerald G. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Acidification Effects and Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOcean acidificationCrustaceanEcologyBiologyCalcium carbonateClimate changeChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been proposed that crustaceans should be excluded from a comparison of biological responses to ocean acidification among organisms with different calcium carbonate (CaCO3 ) forms in their calcified structures. We re-analysed our data without crustaceans and found high variation in organismal responses within CaCO3 categories. We conclude that the CaCO3 polymorph alone does not predict sensitivity, and a consideration of functional differences among organisms is necessary for predicting variation in response to acidification.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0310.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.011

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicOcean Acidification Effects and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207