MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604629008 · doi:10.1002/eap.1552

Inland waters and their role in the carbon cycle of Alaska

2017· article· en· W2604629008 on OpenAlex
S. M. Stackpoole, David Butman, David W. Clow, Kristine L. Verdin, Benjamin V. Gaglioti, Hélène Genet, Robert G. Striegl

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".

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Park ServiceU.S. Geological SurveyNational Research Program for Biopharmaceuticals
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBiogeochemical cycleHydrology (agriculture)Carbon cycleClimate changeFlux (metallurgy)LatitudeGreenhouse gasPrecipitationCarbon dioxideEcosystemOceanographyPhysical geographyAtmospheric sciencesEcologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The magnitude of Alaska ( AK ) inland waters carbon (C) fluxes is likely to change in the future due to amplified climate warming impacts on the hydrology and biogeochemical processes in high latitude regions. Although current estimates of major aquatic C fluxes represent an essential baseline against which future change can be compared, a comprehensive assessment for AK has not yet been completed. To address this gap, we combined available data sets and applied consistent methodologies to estimate river lateral C export to the coast, river and lake carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) and methane ( CH 4 ) emissions, and C burial in lakes for the six major hydrologic regions in the state. Estimated total aquatic C flux for AK was 41 Tg C/yr. Major components of this total flux, in Tg C/yr, were 18 for river lateral export, 17 for river CO 2 emissions, and 8 for lake CO 2 emissions. Lake C burial offset these fluxes by 2 Tg C/yr. River and lake CH 4 emissions were 0.03 and 0.10 Tg C/yr, respectively. The Southeast and South central regions had the highest temperature, precipitation, terrestrial net primary productivity ( NPP ), and C yields (fluxes normalized to land area) were 77 and 42 g C·m −2 ·yr −1 , respectively. Lake CO 2 emissions represented over half of the total aquatic flux from the Southwest (37 g C·m −2 ·yr −1 ). The North Slope, Northwest, and Yukon regions had lesser yields (11, 15, and 17 g C·m 2 ·yr −1 ), but these estimates may be the most vulnerable to future climate change, because of the heightened sensitivity of arctic and boreal ecosystems to intensified warming. Total aquatic C yield for AK was 27 g C·m −2 ·yr −1 , which represented 16% of the estimated terrestrial NPP . Freshwater ecosystems represent a significant conduit for C loss, and a more comprehensive view of land‐water‐atmosphere interactions is necessary to predict future climate change impacts on the Alaskan ecosystem C balance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.237
Teacher spread0.211 · 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