MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2272304328 · doi:10.1080/07055900.2015.1090390

Investigating the Effect of Oceanographic Conditions and Swimming Behaviours on the Movement of Particles in the Gulf of St. Lawrence Using an Individual-Based Numerical Model

2015· article· en· W2272304328 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kyoko Ohashi, Jinyu Sheng

Bibliographic record

VenueATMOSPHERE-OCEAN · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrographyOceanographyOcean currentEstuaryNumerical modelingSalinityCirculation (fluid dynamics)GeologyEnvironmental scienceCurrent (fluid)PhysicsGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study an individual-based numerical model with three-dimensional (3D) and time-dependent fields of circulation and hydrography is used to examine the effects of the physical environment and various biological behaviours on the distribution and movement of particles in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and adjacent waters. The 3D circulation and hydrographic fields are simulated by a numerical ocean circulation model. The model domain covers the St. Lawrence Estuary (SLE), the Gulf of St. Lawrence (GSL), the Scotian Shelf, the Gulf of Maine, and their adjacent waters. The basis of the individual-based model is a numerical scheme that tracks the movement of particles carried by ocean currents. Several swimming behaviours of marine animals are considered with efficient seaward migration in the GSL as the goal. Electronic tagging data for the American eel (Anguilla rostrata) are used as guidance in specifying the behaviours. It is demonstrated that particles that undergo an observed behaviour, known as selective tidal stream transport, are able to exit the SLE more efficiently than particles that are carried passively by the 3D ocean currents. Outside the SLE, particles that search for and swim towards higher salinity move further downstream than those that have a preference for deeper water or swim in random directions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueATMOSPHERE-OCEANSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207