MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586710943 · doi:10.1002/2016jc012460

How well does wind speed predict air‐sea gas transfer in the sea ice zone? A synthesis of radon deficit profiles in the upper water column of the <scp>A</scp>rctic <scp>O</scp>cean

2017· article· en· W2586710943 on OpenAlexaff
Brice Loose, Roger Kelly, Arash Bigdeli, William J. Williams, Richard Krishfield, Michiel M Rutgers van der Loeff, S. Bradley Moran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsWind speedSea iceEnvironmental scienceGeologySea ice concentrationAtmospheric sciencesArctic ice packClimatologySea ice thicknessOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present 34 profiles of radon‐deficit from the ice‐ocean boundary layer of the Beaufort Sea. Including these 34, there are presently 58 published radon‐deficit estimates of air‐sea gas transfer velocity ( k ) in the Arctic Ocean; 52 of these estimates were derived from water covered by 10% sea ice or more. The average value of k collected since 2011 is 4.0 ± 1.2 m d −1 . This exceeds the quadratic wind speed prediction of weighted k ws = 2.85 m d −1 with mean‐weighted wind speed of 6.4 m s −1 . We show how ice cover changes the mixed‐layer radon budget, and yields an “effective gas transfer velocity.” We use these 58 estimates to statistically evaluate the suitability of a wind speed parameterization for k , when the ocean surface is ice covered. Whereas the six profiles taken from the open ocean indicate a statistically good fit to wind speed parameterizations, the same parameterizations could not reproduce k from the sea ice zone. We conclude that techniques for estimating k in the open ocean cannot be similarly applied to determine k in the presence of sea ice. The magnitude of k through gaps in the ice may reach high values as ice cover increases, possibly as a result of focused turbulence dissipation at openings in the free surface. These 58 profiles are presently the most complete set of estimates of k across seasons and variable ice cover; as dissolved tracer budgets they reflect air‐sea gas exchange with no impact from air‐ice gas exchange.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207