MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624281073 · doi:10.1139/as-2016-0016

Long-term landscape impact of petroleum exploration, Melville Island, Canadian High Arctic

2017· article· en· W2624281073 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Siobhan S McCarter, Ashley Rudy, Scott F. Lamoureux

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQueen's UniversityPolar Knowledge Canada
KeywordsPermafrostArcticVegetation (pathology)Physical geographyDisturbance (geology)Environmental scienceArctic vegetationLandformLand useResource (disambiguation)Satellite imageryPetroleumEnvironmental impact assessmentGeologyRemote sensingEarth scienceOceanographyGeographyEcologyTundraGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial land use such as petroleum exploration and infrastructure development has important and lasting impacts on Arctic landscapes. Detailed, site-level investigations have noted impacts that include vehicle tracks, surface and vegetation alteration, soil compaction, and degradation of ice wedge features. We investigated the long-term impact of an extended period of hydrocarbon exploration on Melville Island in the Canadian High Arctic using available remotely sensed data supplemented with field observations over a ∼370 km2 area. Aerial photographs from 1959, 1972, and 1977 and recent satellite imagery (2011 and 2013) were used to determine the effects of industrial activity over periods corresponding to pre-activity, mid-activity, and post-activity. We show that vehicle tracks, site disturbance, and vegetative impacts are still evident after 40 years in this area. Permafrost has degraded at sites with concentrated activity (drill sites, airstrips) and changes to vegetation are clearly discernable. The results demonstrate the utility of this approach for assessment of land use impacts on High Arctic landscapes and provide a means to determine locations for more detailed site-specific field studies. These results may contribute to strategies for environmental monitoring in remote areas where access is impractical or resource intensive.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207