MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2461234094 · doi:10.1002/2016gl070111

Impacts of sea spray geoengineering on ocean biogeochemistry

2016· article· en· W2461234094 on OpenAlexaff
Antti‐Ilari Partanen, David P. Keller, Hannele Korhonen, H. Damon Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersEuropean Research Council
KeywordsBiogeochemistryEnvironmental scienceUpwellingOceanographyPhytoplanktonSeawaterContext (archaeology)NutrientPrimary productionOcean currentAtmospheric sciencesEcosystemGeologyChemistryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We used an Earth system model of intermediate complexity to study the effects of Solar Radiation Management (SRM) by sea spray geoengineering on ocean biogeochemistry. SRM slightly decreased global ocean net primary productivity (NPP) relative to the control run. The lower temperatures in the SRM run decreased NPP directly but also indirectly increased NPP in some regions due to changes in nutrient availability resulting from changes in ocean stratification and circulation. Reduced light availability had a minor effect on global total NPP but a major regional effect near the nutrient‐rich upwelling region off the coast of Peru, where light availability is the main limiting factor for phytoplankton growth in our model. Unused nutrients from regions with decreased NPP also fueled NPP elsewhere. In the context of RCP4.5 simulation used here, SRM decreased ocean carbon uptake due to changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations, seawater chemistry, NPP, temperature, and ocean circulation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicClimate Change and GeoengineeringFrench-language works237,207