MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739452558 · doi:10.5066/f7nc5zfm

Active Layer Data from the Yukon River Basin in Alaska and Canada

2017· article· en· W2739452558 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicole M. Herman‐Mercer

Bibliographic record

VenueUSGS DOI Tool Production Environment · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostActive layerStructural basinWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Drainage basinEnvironmental scienceGeologyClimate changeLayer (electronics)GeographyOceanographyGeomorphologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The active layer data available here has been collected as part of a collaborative monitoring project between the US Geological Survey, Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council, and Yukon River Basin communities known as the Active Layer Network (ALN). The active layer is the layer of soil above the permanently frozen ground (permafrost) that thaws during the summer months and freezes again in the autumn. By measuring the depth of the active layer in the late summer at the time of maximum thaw, we are able to better understand the effects of a warming climate on permafrost. ALN monitoring sites were installed across the Yukon River Basin, in Alaska and Canada, in 2009 and 2010. Each monitoring site consists of a 45 meter by 45 meter grid and sensors. Active layer depth measurements are taken every 5 meters across the grid resulting in 100 measurements made each year. Sensors installed at each location include soil moisture, soil temperature, and air temperature sensors. Sensor data is collected throughout the year and downloaded annually. Active layer depth measurements and sensor data are presented here.

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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
GenreDataset

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSGS DOI Tool Production EnvironmentSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207