2009 Canada Basin seismic reflection and refraction survey, western Arctic Ocean: CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent expedition report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2009 Canadian Polar Margin Seismic Reflection and Refraction Survey was a tremendous success, in large part due to the experience and innovation of its technical staff. The principal objective was to acquire multichannel seismic reflection and refraction data along positions that serve to establish sediment thicknesses along Canadian and US western Arctic continental margins. Secondary objectives included bathymetric sounding at specific locations along this margin to validate bathymetric data acquired by other means (e.g. satellite altimetry) in order to establish baseline information such as the 2500 m contour position. Strategic ship track lines were established to complement existing data to meet UNCLOS and scientific objectives. In addition to the geoscience program, samples and measurements were taken of Arctic Ocean water for chemical and physical oceanographic studies. Seismic system calibration experiments were also conducted to quantify sound signal intensity levels produced by the seismic system. 4069 line-km of high quality multichannel seismic reflection data were acquired, in addition to seismic refraction data recorded from 51 sonobuoys deployments. 8355 line-km of single beam bathymetry were achieved, in addition to 177 helicopter spot soundings. The physical/chemical oceanographic portion of the program resulted in 7 rosette water sample stations seven CTD/SVP casts and 72 XCTD casts.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".