MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899031175

Integrated seabed mapping of Frobisher Bay, Nunavut, to support infrastructure development, exploration, and natural hazard assessment

2015· article· en· W2899031175 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D Mate, D C Campbell, J V Barrie, John E. Clark, J. Muggah, Tom W. Bell, Donald L. Forbes

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of New Hampshire Scholars Repository (University of New Hampshire at Manchester) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayNatural (archaeology)SeabedHazard analysisEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeologyOceanographyGeographyEnvironmental scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated seabed mapping is an important prerequisite for effective management of offshore areas. With the rapidly expanding City of Iqaluit on its shores and mineral resources on nearby Hall Peninsula, Frobisher Bay will undoubtedly see new infrastructure development over the next several years. The 2014 field season marked the first of a two-year, collaborative, seabed-mapping project in the region. The purpose of the project is to improve understanding of the geology of Frobisher Bay and, ultimately, to support decision-making with respect to its seabed use. Using both legacy and newly acquired high-resolution seabed-morphology and geology data, the project will generate a suite of bathymetric and geological maps for the floor of Frobisher Bay. Initial results reveal three zones (outer, middle and inner) with distinctive seabed morphology and surficial geology, and extensive evidence of seabed-slope instability in the inner zone.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.188 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of New Hampshire Scholars Repository (University of New Hampshire at Manchester)Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207