MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2982168147 · doi:10.4095/300231

Mass balance of ice caps in the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Arctic Canada: 2014-2015

2017· report· en· W2982168147 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Burgess

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueen (butterfly)ArcticBalance (ability)GeographyOceanographyPhysical geographyGeologyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In-situ glacier mass balance surveys were conducted by Natural Resources Canada in April/May 2016 across the Devon, Meighen, South Melville, and Agassiz Ice Caps, Queen Elizabeth Islands. Survey results indicate significantly negative values over all ice caps in the 2014-2015 mass balance year with Meighen and Melville Ice Caps experiencing the fourth most negative mass balance year on record thinning by -115 and -89 cm respectively while the Devon Ice Cap, which thinned by -39 cm, experienced the sixth most negative year on record. After the relatively cool summers of 2013 and 2014, extremely negative mass balance values for 2014-2015 are more consistent with the post-2005 trend during which melt rates of high Arctic glaciers have been 3-5 times more negative than the long-term (1960-2013) average. The climatic net mass balance measurements from the Agassiz and Devon (NW) Ice Caps indicated an increase of the Equilibrium Line Altitude by 300 m and 400 m respectively relative to the long-term means. Associated water equivalent mass loss of 0.68, 0.052, and 0.053 Gt for the Devon (NW), Meighen, and South Melville Ice Caps respectively indicate a net positive contribution to global sea-level rise from these three sites for the 2014-2015 balance year.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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