Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge of how and why oxygenic photosynthesis, eukaryotes, metazoans, and humans evolved on Earth is important to the search for complex life outside our Solar System. Hence, one grand challenge for modern geoscience research is to reconstruct the story of how Earth's environment and life coevolved through time. A critical part of the effort to understand Earth's story is the use of geochemical signatures from the rock record—paleo-oxybarometers—to constrain atmosphere and ocean O 2 levels and their spatiotemporal variations. Recent advances in analytical methods and improved knowledge of elemental and isotopic (bio)geochemical cycles have fostered development and refinement of many paleo-oxybarometers. Each offers its unique perspective and challenges toward obtaining robust (semi)quantitative O 2 estimates. Overall, these paleo-oxybarometers have provided critical new insights but have also spurred new debates about Earth's oxygenation and its impact on biological evolution (and vice versa). Integrated approaches with multiple paleo-oxybarometers are now more critical than ever. ▪ Paleo-oxybarometers estimate atmosphere or ocean O 2 levels, providing insight on how Earth's environment and life coevolved over time. ▪ Recent conceptual, analytical, and modeling advances, aided by studies on modern environments, have improved quantitative O 2 estimates. ▪ Atmosphere and ocean paleo-oxybarometers reveal a complex history of dynamic O 2 fluctuations since oxygenic photosynthesis evolved. ▪ Further improvements in the accuracy and robustness of atmosphere-ocean O 2 estimates will require more integrated approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".