MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187965411

Joint Assessment and Monitoring Programme (JAMP) National Comments regarding the Norwegian Data for 2004

2001· article· en· W2187965411 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Norman W. Green

Bibliographic record

VenueBIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway)) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyDivision of ChemistryNorsk Institutt for Vannforskning
KeywordsImposexMercury (programming language)NorwegianFisheryEnvironmental scienceCadmiumEcologyMolluscaBiologyChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report is part of the Norwegian contribution to the SIME 2007 meeting administrated by OSPAR. JAMP 2005 included the monitoring of contaminants in blue mussel (61), dogwhelk (8), cod (9) and flatfish (12) along the coast of Norway from Oslo to Bergen, Lofoten and Varangerfjord. The results indicated elevated levels of contaminants in the inner Oslofjord (PCBs, mercury and lead in cod; PCBs in blue mussel), and Sørfjord and Hardangerfjord (cadmium, lead, mercury and DDT in blue mussel, and mercury in cod). The results from the remaining stations showed low or moderate levels of contamination in 2005. Considering the whole monitoring period, significant upward trends were found for mercury in cod from the inner Oslofjord and a downward trend was found for lead in blue mussel from Sørfjord/Hardangerfjord. The “Pollution" index was between “marked” and “severe,” as it was in 2004. The “Reference” index was between “slight” and “moderate” as before. Contamination of organotin in blue mussel and imposex in dogwhelk were still apparent, however, there is some indication of downward trends. The results from studies using biological effects methods in cod are discussed

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway))Same topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207