Scientific Discoveries in the Central Arctic Ocean Based on Seafloor Mapping Carried Out to Support Article 76 Extended Continental Shelf Claims
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the last decades of diminishing sea-ice cover in the Arctic Ocean, ship operations are only possible in vast sectors of the central Arctic using the most capable polar-class icebreakers. There are less than a handful of these icebreakers outfitted with modern seafloor mapping equipment. This implies either fierce competition between those having an interest in using these icebreakers for investigations of the shape and properties of Arctic Ocean seafloor or, preferably, collaboration. In this presentation examples will be shown of scientific discoveries based on mapping data collected during Arctic Ocean icebreaker expeditions carried out for the purpose of substantiating claims for an extended continental shelf under United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Article 76. Scientific results will be presented from the suite of Lomonosov Ridge off Greenland (LOMROG) expeditions (2007, 2009, and 2012), shedding new light on Arctic Ocean oceanography and glacial history. The Swedish icebreaker Oden was used in collaboration between Sweden and Denmark during LOMROG to map and sample portions of the central Arctic Ocean; specifically focused on the Lomonosov Ridge north of Greenland. While the main objective of the Danish participation was seafloor and sub-seabed mapping to substantiate their Article 76 claim, LOMROG also included several scientific components, with scientists from both countries involved. Other examples to be presented are based on data collected using US Coast Guard Cutter Healy, which for several years has carried out mapping in the western Arctic Ocean for the US continental shelf program. All bathymetric data collected with Oden and Healy have been contributed to the International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO). This is also the case for bathymetric data collected by Canadian Coast Guard Ship Louis S. St-Laurent for Canada’s extended continental shelf claim. Together, the bathymetric data collected during these Article 76 mapping missions comprises, by far, the most comprehensive contribution to the last Version 3.0 of IBCAO.
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 | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".