MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2582739005 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2016-0123

Flux of methane release and carbon dioxide sequestration at Winterhouse Canyon, Gros Morne, Newfoundland, Canada: a site of continental serpentinization

2017· article· en· W2582739005 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Liam S. Morrissey, Penny L. Morrill

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCanyonMethaneCarbon sequestrationFlux (metallurgy)Carbon dioxideAtmosphere (unit)GeologyOceanographyEnvironmental scienceEarth scienceGeomorphologyEcologyChemistryGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We measured CO2, CH4, and N2O gas fluxes from a pool of ultra-basic water discharging from serpentinized rock in Winterhouse Canyon, Gros Morne, Newfoundland. The flux of CH4 released and CO2 sequestered were calculated to be 4.6 × 10−7 and 1.9 × 10−5 mol/(m2·min), respectively, whereas N2O concentrations showed little change. The net radiative forcing owing to the changing concentrations of CO2 and CH4 during the sampling period was –0.21, suggesting that the ultra-basic pool in Winterhouse Canyon has a net cooling effect on the atmosphere. Similarly, the net global warming potential over a time horizon of 100 years was –7, also suggesting a small cooling of the atmosphere. Overall this study was the first to consider the impact of CO2 sequestration and CH4 emissions from an ultra-basic pool above serpentinized rock and demonstrated the need for more research on the net global impacts of serpentinization.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→