MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561058510 · doi:10.5376/ijms.2016.06.0051

Vertical Turbulent at Thermocline Layer in Makassar Strait

2016· article· en· W2561058510 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dahlia Prihatini, Mulia Purba, Yuli Naulita, Adi Purwandana

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marine Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermoclineGeologyTurbulenceOceanographyLayer (electronics)ClimatologyMeteorologyGeographyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Makassar Strait is one of the main passage of Indonesian Throughflow (ITF). The purpose of this research is to study the spatial distribution of vertical turbulent at thermocline layer (at a depth about 100-350 m) of the Makassar Strait and to analyze the forcing that trigger it. Hydrographic data obtained from Widya Nusantara Expedition (Ewin) in June 2013, which consists of 29 CTD stations spread across Makassar Strait were use for this study. Water-mass test of GK test was applied to the CTD data to eliminate density inversion caused by noise. The result of this study show that an active turbulent with kinetic energy dissipation rate (e) of 0(10 -9 -10 -8 ) Wkg -1 and diffusivity vertical of K ρ 0(10 -5 -10 -3 ) m 2 s -1 . These results were categorized as relatively strong vertical turbulent and found at a depth of 100-200 m in the northern part of the strait at the entrance of Arlindo. Meanwhile at the southern part of the strait near the exit passage of Arlindo, the vertical turbulent was more intensive on the west side of the strait with e (10 -9 ) Wkg -1 and K ρ (10 -4 ) m 2 s -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)0.000
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 score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207