MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3080490320 · doi:10.1029/2020gl089573

A 4‐Month Lead Predictor of Open‐Water Onset in Bering Strait

2020· article· en· W3080490320 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaofan Luo, Yali Wang, Youyu Lu, Hao Wei, Wei Zhao, Hongtao Nie, Xianmin Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLead (geology)Open waterOpen seaCapeOceanographyClimatologyGeologySea iceCurrent (fluid)Environmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study reveals that the yearday of open‐water onset (topen) in Bering Strait can be predicted with a lead time of about 4 months using a regression equation topen = 37.45CCN + 125.2 (in Julian days), with an averaged absolute error of 5 days and the maximum error of 12 days, where CCN is the ice concentration averaged from 16th January to 15th February near Cape Navarin. This “predictor” is revealed through analyzing the solution of a regional ocean and sea‐ice model. A key factor contribution to the prediction is that the prior winter ice concentration is controlled by the sea surface temperature, and persists into the start of the melting phase near the marginal ice zone in the Cape Navarin area. As ice melts near Cape Navarin, successive melting due to solar heat absorption and lateral heat transport occurs rapidly downstream along Anadyr Current.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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