MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320160647 · doi:10.5194/cp-12-807-2016

Model simulations of early westward flow across the Tasman Gateway during the early Eocene

2016· article· en· W2320160647 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Willem P. Sijp, Anna S. von der Heydt, Peter K. Bijl

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate of the past · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsGeologyOceanographyThroughflowOcean currentClimatologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The timing and role in ocean circulation and climate of the opening of Southern Ocean gateways is as yet elusive. Recent micropalaeontological studies suggest the onset of westward throughflow of surface waters from the SW Pacific into the Australo-Antarctic Gulf through a southern shallow opening of the Tasman Gateway from 49–50 Ma onwards, a direction that is counter to the present-day eastward-flowing Antarctic Circumpolar Current. Here, we present the first model results specific to the early-to-middle Eocene where, in agreement with the field evidence, southerly shallow opening of the Tasman Gateway indeed causes a westward flow across the Tasman Gateway. As a result, modelled estimates of dinoflagellate biogeography are in agreement with the recent findings. Crucially, in this situation where Australia is still situated far south and almost attached to Antarctica, the Drake Passage must be sufficiently restricted to allow the prevailing easterly wind pattern to set up this southerly restricted westward flow. In contrast, an open Drake Passage, up to 517 m deep, leads to an eastward flow, even when the Tasman Gateway and the Australo-Antarctic gulf are entirely contained within the latitudes of easterly wind.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations41
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimate of the pastSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207