MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2948187582 · doi:10.5194/os-2019-54

Assessment of variability of the thermohaline structure and transport of Atlanticwater in the Arctic Ocean based on NABOS CTD data

2019· article· en· W2948187582 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
N. V. Zhurbas, Natalia P. Kuzmina

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRussian Science Foundation
KeywordsTransectGeologyOceanographyStructural basinThermohaline circulationContinental shelfWater massCanada BasinTrough (economics)ArcticClimatologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Data of CTD transects across continental slope of the Eurasian Basin and the St. Anna Trough performed during NABOS (Nansen and Amundsen Basins Observing System) project in 2003–2015 are used to assess transport and propagation features of the Atlantic Water (AW) in the Arctic Ocean. Estimates of θ-S indices and volume flow rate of the current carrying the AW in the Eurasian Basin were obtained. The assessments were based on the analysis of CTD data including 33 sections in the Eurasian Basin, 4 transects in the St. Anna Trough and 2 transects in the Makarov Basin; additionally a CTD transect of the PolarStern-1996 expedition (PS-96) was considered. Using spatial distributions of temperature, salinity, and density on the transects and applying θ-S analysis, the variability of thermohaline pattern on the AW pathway along the slope of Eurasian Basin was investigated. The Fram Strait branch of the Atlantic Water (FSBW) was satisfactorily identified on all transects, including two transects in the Makarov Basin (along 159° E), while the сold waters, which can be associated with the influence of the Barents Sea branch of the Atlantic water (BSBW), on the transects along 126° E, 142° E and 159° E, were observed in the depth range below 800 m and had a negligible effect on the spatial structure of isopycnic surfaces. Special attention was paid to the variability of the volume flow rate of the AW propagating along the continental slope of the Eurasian Basin. The geostrophic volume flow rate was calculated using the dynamic method. An interpretation of the spatial and temporal variability of hydrological parameters characterizing the flow of the AW in the Eurasian Basin is presented. The geostrophic volume flow rate decreases significantly farther away from the areas of the AW inflow to the Eurasian Basin. Thus, the geostrophic estimate of the volume rate for the AW flow in the Makarov Basin at 159° E was found to be more than an order of magnitude smaller than the estimates of the volume flow rate in the Eurasian Basin, implying that the major part of the AW entering the Arctic Ocean circulates cyclonically within the Nansen and Amundsen Basins. There is an absolute maximum of θmax (AW core temperature) in 2006–2008 time series and a maximum in 2013, but only at 103° E. Salinity S(θmax) (AW core salinity) time series display an increase of the AW salinity in 2006–2008 and 2013 (at 103° E) that can be referred to as a AW salinization in the early 2000-ies. The maxima of θmax and S(θmax) in 2006–2008 and 2013 were accompanied by the volume flow rate highs. Additionally the time average volume rates were calculated for the FSBW flow (in the longitude range 31–92° E), for the BSBW flow in the St. Anna Trough and for a combined FSBW and BSBW flow in longitude range 94–107° E. A detailed discussion of the results is presented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→