MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594738842 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2017.00055

Obtaining Phytoplankton Diversity from Ocean Color: A Scientific Roadmap for Future Development

2017· article· en· W2594738842 on OpenAlexaff
Astrid Bracher, Heather A. Bouman, Robert J. W. Brewin, Annick Bricaud, Vanda Brotas, Áurea Maria Ciotti, Lesley Clementson, Emmanuel Devred, Annalisa Di Cicco, Stephanie Dutkiewicz, Nick J. Hardman‐Mountford, Anna E. Hickman, Martin Hieronymi, Takafumi Hirata, Svetlana Loza, Colleen B. Mouw, Emanuele Organelli, ‪Dionysios E. Raitsos, Julia Uitz, Meike Vogt, Aleksandra Wolanin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Centre for Earth ObservationJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyNatural Environment Research CouncilSociedad Española de Oncología MédicaSight Research UKEuropean Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPhytoplanktonOcean colorEnvironmental scienceSatelliteComputer scienceBiogeochemical cycleOceanographyMerge (version control)Remote sensingEnvironmental resource managementEcologyGeographyBiologyEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To improve our understanding of the role of phytoplankton for marine ecosystems and global biogeochemical cycles, information on the global distribution of major phytoplankton groups is essential. Although algorithms have been developed to assess phytoplankton diversity from space for over two decades, so far the application of these data sets has been limited. This scientific roadmap identifies user needs, summarizes the current state of the art, and pinpoints major gaps in long-term objectives to deliver space-derived phytoplankton diversity data that meets the user requirements. These major gaps in using ocean color to estimate phytoplankton community structure were identified as: a) the mismatch between satellite, in situ and model data on phytoplankton composition, b) the lack of quantitative uncertainty estimates provided with satellite data, c) the spectral limitation of current sensors to enable the full exploitation of backscattered sunlight, and d) the very limited applicability of satellite algorithms determining phytoplankton composition for regional, especially coastal or inland, waters. Recommendation for actions include but are not limited to: i) an increased communication and round-robin exercises among and within the related expert groups, ii) the launching of higher spectrally and spatially resolved sensors, iii) the development of algorithms that exploit hyperspectral information, and of iv) techniques to merge and synergistically use the various streams of continuous information on phytoplankton diversity from various satellite sensors’ and in situ data to ensure long-term monitoring of phytoplankton composition.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.019
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.010

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations198
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207