Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The potential for using the air‐sea exchange rate of oxygen as a tracer for net community biological production in the ocean is greatly enhanced by recent accuracy improvements for in situ measurements of oxygen on unmanned platforms. A limiting factor for determining the exchange process is evaluating the air‐sea flux contributed by bubble processes produced by breaking waves, particularly during winter months under high winds. Highly accurate measurements of noble gases (Ne, Ar & Kr) and nitrogen, N 2 , in seawater are tracers of the importance of bubble process in the surface mixed layer. We use measured distributions of these gases in the ventilated thermocline of the North Pacific and an annual time series of N 2 in the surface ocean of the NE Subarctic Pacific to evaluate four different air‐water exchange models chosen to represent the range of model interpretation of bubble processes. We find that models must have an explicit bubble mechanism to reproduce concentrations of insoluble atmospheric gases, but there are periods when they all depart from observations. The recent model of Liang et al. (2013) stems from a highly resolved model of bubble plumes and categorizes bubble mechanisms into those that are small enough to collapse and larger ones that exchange gases before they resurface, both of which are necessary to explain the data.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".