MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889867882 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2018.00337

Ocean Solutions to Address Climate Change and Its Effects on Marine Ecosystems

2018· article· en· W2889867882 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Pierre Gattuso, Alexandre Magnan, Laurent Bopp, William W. L. Cheung, Carlos M. Duarte, Jochen Hinkel, Elizabeth Mcleod, Fiorenza Micheli, Andreas Oschlies, Phillip Williamson, Raphaël Billé, Vasiliki Ι. Chalastani, Ruth D. Gates, Jean‐Olivier Irisson, Jack J. Middelburg, Hans‐Otto Pörtner, Greg H. Rau

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal and Marine Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFonds Français pour l'Environnement MondialKing Abdullah University of Science and TechnologyAgence Nationale de la RechercheDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAgence Française de DéveloppementInternational Atomic Energy AgencyEuropean CommissionNational Science FoundationNature ConservancyPrince Albert II of Monaco FoundationGlobal Environment FacilityBundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit
KeywordsClimate changeMarine ecosystemOceanographyEcosystemEnvironmental scienceOcean acidificationClimatologyEnvironmental resource managementEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Paris agreement target of limiting global surface warming to 1.5-2°C compared to pre-industrial levels by 2100 will heavily impact the ocean. While ambitious mitigation and adaptation are both needed, the ocean provides major opportunities for action to reduce climate change globally and its impacts on vital ecosystems and ecosystem services. A comprehensive and systematic assessment of 13 global- and local-scale, ocean-based measures was performed to help steer the development and implementation of technologies and actions towards a sustainable outcome. We show that (1) all measures have tradeoffs and multiple criteria must be used for a comprehensive assessment of their potential, (2) greatest benefit is derived by combining global and local solutions, some of which could be implemented or scaled-up immediately, (3) some measures are too uncertain to be recommended yet, (4) political consistency must be achieved through effective cross-scale governance mechanisms, (5) scientific effort must focus on effectiveness, co-benefits, disbenefits, and costs of poorly tested as well as new and emerging measures.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations445
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicCoastal and Marine ManagementFrench-language works237,207