The influx of marine debris from the Great Japan Tsunami of 2011 to North American shorelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marine debris is one of the leading threats to the ocean and the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami on March 11, 2011 washed away an estimated 5million tons of debris in a single, tragic event. Here we used shoreline surveys, disaster debris reports and ocean drift models to investigate the temporal and spatial trends in the arrival of tsunami marine debris. The increase in debris influx to surveyed North American and Hawaiian shorelines was substantial and significant, representing a 10 time increase over the baseline in northern Washington State where a long term dataset was available. The tsunami event brought different types of debris along the coast, with high-windage items dominant in Alaska and British Columbia and large, medium-windage items in Washington State and Oregon. Recorded cumulative debris landings to North America were close to 100,000 items in the four year study period. The temporal peaks in measured shoreline debris and debris reports match the ocean drift model solutions. Mitigation and monitoring activities, such as shoreline surveys, provide crucial data and monitoring for potential impacts should be continued in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".