MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007880518

Characterization of double diffusive convection steps and heat budget in the deep Arctic Ocean

2013· article· en· W3007880518 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeat fluxGeothermal heatingGeologyGeothermal gradientHydrographyHeat transferAdvectionMixed layerConvectionThermal diffusivityAtmospheric sciencesGeophysicsClimatologyMeteorologyMechanicsGeothermal energyOceanographyThermodynamicsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we explore the hydrographic structure and heat budget in the deep Canada Basin by using data measured with McLane-Moored-Profilers (MMP), bottom pressure recorders (BPR), and conductivity-temperature-depth (CTD) profilers. Upward from the bottom, a homogeneous bottom layer and its overlaying double diffusive convection (DDC) steps are well identified at Mooring A ( 75 degrees N,150 degrees W). We find that the deep water is in weak diapycnal mixing because the effective diffusivity of the bottom layer is approximate to 1.8x10-5m2s-1, while that of the other steps is approximate to 10-6m2s-1. The vertical heat flux through the DDC steps is evaluated by using different methods. We find that the heat flux ( 0.1-11mWm-2) is much smaller than geothermal heating ( approximate to 50mWm-2). This suggests that the stack of DDC steps acts as a thermal barrier in the deep basin. Moreover, the temporal distributions of temperature and salinity differences across the interface are exponential, whereas those of heat flux and effective diffusivity are found to be approximately lognormal. Both are the result of strong intermittency. Between 2003 and 2011, temperature fluctuations close to the sea floor were distributed asymmetrically and skewed toward positive values, which provide a direct observation that geothermal heating was transferred into the ocean. Both BPR and CTD data suggest that geothermal heating and not the warming of the upper ocean is the dominant mechanism responsible for the warming of deep water. As the DDC steps prevent vertical heat transfer, geothermal heating is unlikely to have a significant effect on the middle and upper Arctic Ocean.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.179 · 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