MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982120659 · doi:10.4095/287895

Imaging pockmarks and ring-like features in Hudson Bay from multibeam bathymetry data

2011· report· en· W2982120659 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Roger, Mathieu J. Duchesne, Patrick Lajeunesse, Guillaume St‐Onge, Nicolas Pinet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBathymetryBayOceanographyGeologyRing (chemistry)Remote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multibeam bathymetry data collected in Hudson Bay in 2004, 2005, 2007 and 2010 during an ArcticNet cruises onboard the CCGS Amundsen show two sectors characterized by a high density of pockmarks and peculiar ring structures. The first sector is situated in northern Hudson Bay close to Mansel Island and is characterised by a ± 2 km long depression in which pockmarks with an average diameter of 100 m and an average depth of 10 m are present. The second sector is divided into two distinct parts; a northern domain characterized by a significant number of pockmarks and a southern one dominated by abundant circular ring-like features. The ring structures are < 200 m in diameter and 10 m deep and have a central peak. The occurrence of these features could be explained by salt doming that fractured bedrock. The occurrence of the ring structures and the pockmarks within the same area suggests that they might be process-related and that fluid escape may be an important characteristic for both types of morphological features. The very good state of preservation of both the pockmarks and the ring structures and the fact that they attenuate iceberg scours suggest that they have been formed recently (after deglaciation, i.e., after ~8500 years).

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207