Circumpolar digital elevation models > 55° N with links to geotiff images
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to generate a global DEM elevation information from the\nfollowing datasets were considered:\n* SRTM-3 DEM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission)\n* RTM (Russian Topographic Maps)\n* CDED (Canada Digital Elevation Data)\n* U.S. Geological Survey DEM (for Alaska).\nAll datasets have been downloaded and checked for coverage and quality before further processing. For each dataset, description of image specifications, processing applied and quality control is provided in the product guide. The database of elevation provided to the DUE Permafrost project consists of tiles with following specification\n* Latitude coverage: > 55 deg N\n* Longitude coverage: full\n* Elevation: as in original datasets\n* Projection: equiangular, i.e. latitude/longitude\n* Ellipsoid/datum: WGS-84\n* Elevation data on the integer degree lines (all four sides) overlap with the corresponding profiles on the surrounding eight blocks.\n* Tile coverage: 1 X 1 deg, posting: 3 arcsec = 0.0008333333 deg (i.e., approximately 90 m at Equator)\nSee hdl:10013/epic.39123.d024 for an overview figure. The product guide: hdl:10013/epic.39123.d013.\nThis dataset is part of the ESA Data User Element (DUE) Permafrost Full Product Set (doi:10.1594/PANGAEA.780111).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.333 | 0.047 |
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 it