MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2269267317

Usuing the Arctic Environment Test Basin to study the dynamics of dissolved organic matter in sea ice

2014· article· en· W2269267317 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David N. Thomas, Jiayun Zhou, Hermanni Kaartokallio, Jean‐Louis Tison, Bruno Delille, Linda Jørgensen, Anne‐Mari Luhtanen, Gerhard Kattner, Colin A. Stedmon, Riitta Autio, Gerhard Dieckmann, Hilary Kennedy, Karl‐Ulrich Evers

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSea iceOceanographyArcticArctic ice packDissolved organic carbonCanada BasinEnvironmental scienceOrganic matterGeologyStructural basinGeomorphologyChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a report from the INTERICE 5 project that used the Arctic Environment Test Basin at HSVA from 21 May to 19 June 2012. The overarching aim was to investigate the physical and biological controls of dissolved organic matter incorporation into growing sea ice and the effect of melting once the ice had consolidated. Measurements were also made on the CO2 fluxes at the ice surface in relation to the chemical and biological changes taking place in the ice. The Interice 5 team was a multidisciplinary group of glaciologists, chemists and microbiologists from Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany and U.K. They were able to build on the experiences of previous INTERICE 2, 3 & 4 projects to maximize the opportunities from the facility. The preliminary results from the experiment will be presented, in the context of what is known about these processes from field campaigns.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège)Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207