MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3042176909 · doi:10.5194/cpd-11-2389-2015

Palaeo sea-level and ice-sheet databases: problems, strategies and perspectives

2015· article· en· W3042176909 on OpenAlexaff
André Düsterhus, Alessio Rovere, A. E. Carlson, Natasha Barlow, Tom Bradwell, Andrea Dutton, W. Roland Gehrels, Fiona Hibbert, M.P. Hijma, Benjamin P. Horton, Volker Klemann, Robert E. Kopp, Dorit Sivan, L. Tarasov, Torbjörn E. Törnqvist

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsDatabaseTask (project management)Computer scienceIce sheetKey (lock)Raw dataData scienceGeologyEngineeringOceanographySystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Sea-level and ice-sheet databases are essential tools for evaluating palaeoclimatic changes. However, database creation poses considerable challenges and problems related to the composition and needs of scientific communities creating raw data, the compiliation of the database, and finally using it. There are also issues with data standardisation and database infrastructure, which should make the database easy to understand and use with different layers of complexity. Other challenges are correctly assigning credit to original authors, and creation of databases that are centralised and maintained in long-term digital archives. Here, we build on the experience of the PALeo constraints on SEA level rise (PALSEA) community by outlining strategies for designing a self-consistent and standardised database of changes in sea level and ice sheets, identifying key points that need attention when undertaking the task of database creation.

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)0.090
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0900.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0300.038
Open science0.0080.009
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→