MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470608361 · doi:10.1002/2016gl068097

Long‐term variability of surface nutrient concentrations in the North Pacific

2016· article· en· W2470608361 on OpenAlexafffund
Sayaka Yasunaka, Tsuneo Ono, Yukihiro Nojiri, Frank A. Whitney, Chisato Wada, Akihiko Murata, Shin‐Ichiro Nakaoka, Shigeki Hosoda

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsSubarctic climatePacific decadal oscillationNutrientOcean gyreOceanographyEnvironmental sciencePacific oceanNorth Pacific HighGeologyNitrateClimatologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present the spatial distributions and temporal changes of the long‐term variability of surface nutrient concentrations in the North Pacific by using nutrient samples collected by volunteer ships and research vessels from 1961 to 2012. Nutrient samples are optimally interpolated onto 1° × 1° monthly grid boxes. When the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is in its positive phase, nutrient concentrations in the western North Pacific are significantly higher than the climatological means, and those in the eastern North Pacific are significantly lower. When the North Pacific Gyre Oscillation is in its positive phase, nutrient concentrations in the subarctic are significantly higher than the climatological means. The trends of phosphate and silicate averaged over the North Pacific are −0.012 ± 0.005 µmol l−1 decade−1 and −0.38 ± 0.13 µmol l−1 decade−1, whereas the nitrate trend is not significant (0.01 ± 0.13 µmol l−1 decade−1).

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207