MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780794709 · doi:10.1525/elementa.272

Commentary on the outputs and future of Biogeochemical Exchange Processes at Sea-Ice Interfaces (BEPSII)

2017· article· en· W2780794709 on OpenAlexaff
Nadja Steiner, Jacqueline Stefels

Bibliographic record

VenueElementa Science of the Anthropocene · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiogeochemical cycleSea iceEnvironmental scienceEarth system scienceOceanographyCryosphereEarth scienceClimatologyGeologyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biogeochemical processes associated with sea ice are still inadequately described and poorly represented in models, making it difficult to properly quantify the impacts of climate change in polar regions. Within the framework of the international Scientific Committee of Ocean Research (SCOR) working group 140, BEPSII, a community of sea-ice biogeochemical scientists established guidelines for the measurement of biogeochemical processes in sea ice, collated observed data, synthesized knowledge of sea-ice biogeochemical processes, and identified the feedbacks between biogeochemical and physical processes at the terrestrial-ocean-ice-snow-atmosphere interfaces and within the sea-ice matrix. Many of these results are presented in Elementa’s Special Feature on BEPSII. By bringing together experimentalists and modelers, major improvements of sea-ice biochemistry models have been achieved which are anticipated to affect models on micro- to global scales. However, large gaps still exist in our understanding of detailed biogeochemical processes in sea ice, their seasonal evolution and their interactions with surrounding environments. The BEPSII community recommends continued focus on the development of reproducible methods and techniques for reliable inter-study comparisons, to enhance our understanding in areas where gaps have been identified via coordinated process studies combining modeling tools, laboratory experiments and field studies, and on the use of such studies to develop conceptual models helping us to understand the overall system.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0070.004
Research integrity0.0360.046
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.007

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElementa Science of the AnthropoceneSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207