MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964625645 · doi:10.1016/s0967-0653(98)85750-5

10.1016/s0967-0653(98)85750-5

2000· article· en· W2964625645 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gabriela Carrara, Giovanni Bortoluzzi, Nevio Zitellini, Enrico Bonatti, Daniele Brunelli, Anna Cipriani, Paola Fabretti, Luca Gasperini, Marco Ligi, Penitenti Daniela, P. F. Sciuto, А. О. Мазарович, A. A. Peyve, N. N. Turko, Д. А. Гилод

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies Worldwide
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriple junctionGeologyOceanographyGeographyPaleontologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bouvet Triple Junction is located where the Antarctic, south American and African plates meet in the south Atlantic. Two oceanographic expeditions were carried out in this region in 1994 and 1996 by the Institute of Marine Geology, CNR (Bologna), and the Geology Institute of the Russian Academy of Science (Moscow) under the sponsorship of the Italian Antarctic Research Program (PNRA). The main objectives of these expeditions were to define the structural, morphological and petrographical differences of the three divergent margins that meet in the Bouvet region, and to clarify the evolution in space and time of the geometry of the Triple Junction. Single and multichannel seismic reflection, gravimetric and magnetometric profiles were obtained during the first cruise, with the R/V Akademik Strakhov, in addition to medium resolution multibeam bathymetry of the Bouvet island area and in the southern portion of the Mid Atlantic Ridge. The second cruise, carried out with the R/V Gelendzhik, completed the bathymetric survey of the entire Triple Junction region using an high resolution multibeam system. Seafloor sampling was carried out by dredging in both cruises. Some of the data obtained during these two expeditions are reported in this paper.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)1.0001.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.149
Teacher spread0.143 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicGeological and Geophysical Studies WorldwideFrench-language works237,207