MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331158434 · doi:10.1016/j.polar.2016.03.006

Mapping of the air–sea CO2 flux in the Arctic Ocean and its adjacent seas: Basin-wide distribution and seasonal to interannual variability

2016· article· en· W2331158434 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sayaka Yasunaka, Akihiko Murata, Eiji Watanabe, Melissa Chierici, Agneta Fransson, Steven van Heuven, Mario Hoppema, Masao Ishii, Truls Johannessen, Naohiro Kosugi, Siv K. Lauvset, Jeremy T. Mathis, Shigeto Nishino, Abdirahman M Omar, Are Olsen, Daisuke Sasano, Taro Takahashi, Rik Wanninkhof

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBjerknessenteret for klimaforskning, Universitetet i BergenJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNorges ForskningsrådNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsArcticOceanographyEnvironmental scienceFlux (metallurgy)Arctic dipole anomalyCanada BasinArctic geoengineeringClimatologyGeologyArctic ice packSea ice thicknessAntarctic sea ice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We produced 204 monthly maps of the air–sea CO 2 flux in the Arctic north of 60°N, including the Arctic Ocean and its adjacent seas, from January 1997 to December 2013 by using a self-organizing map technique. The partial pressure of CO 2 ( p CO 2 ) in surface water data were obtained by shipboard underway measurements or calculated from alkalinity and total inorganic carbon of surface water samples. Subsequently, we investigated the basin-wide distribution and seasonal to interannual variability of the CO 2 fluxes. The 17-year annual mean CO 2 flux shows that all areas of the Arctic Ocean and its adjacent seas were net CO 2 sinks. The estimated annual CO 2 uptake by the Arctic Ocean was 180 TgC yr −1 . The CO 2 influx was strongest in winter in the Greenland/Norwegian Seas (>15 mmol m −2 day −1 ) and the Barents Sea (>12 mmol m −2 day −1 ) because of strong winds, and strongest in summer in the Chukchi Sea (∼10 mmol m −2 day −1 ) because of the sea-ice retreat. In recent years, the CO 2 uptake has increased in the Greenland/Norwegian Sea and decreased in the southern Barents Sea, owing to increased and decreased air–sea p CO 2 differences, respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations105
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolar ScienceSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207