MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123852191

Comparing Species Assemblages of Deposited Epiphytic and Benthic Foraminifera in North Sound, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands

2020· article· en· W3123852191 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danielle Clement

Bibliographic record

VenueStudent Research Proceedings · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForaminiferaOceanographyReefBenthic zoneGeologySound (geography)Coral reefShoreSedimentPaleontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tropical islands that are in the paths of tropical storms need large sandy shores to protect inland settlements and habitats. The balance between gains and losses of sediment along shorelines (sediment budget) is, especially in areas like the Cayman Islands without major rivers or other inflows of new sediment, often made up almost entirely of the shells and tests of marine organisms. In North Sound, most of the sediment is generated from the shells of bivalves, gastropods and foraminifera, the latter of which can be found crusting on sea grasses or on the sea floor. In this project, samples from two sediment cores taken from different locations in North Sound were examined, and the species assemblages compared. Core B15 is closer to the coral reef fringing North Sound, and so was expected to have more reef-dwelling foraminifera than core B9, which is farther from the reef and closer to the inland shore. The locations are also affected by different water circulation patterns, varying inputs of fresh seawater from the ocean and different current speeds. The results were not as expected, with core B9 actually containing more reef-dwelling species than core B15. Potential explanations for this include B9 being in an area with a slower current, allowing more of the foraminifera to settle, and inversely the same foraminifera being swept away from the B15 position. B15 also had far more shells from other invertebrates such as bivalves, which suggests it may be more nutrient rich. Presented in absentia on April 27, 2020 at Student Research Day at MacEwan University in Edmonton, Alberta. (Conference cancelled.) Faculty Mentor: Hilary Corlett Department: Earth and Planetary Sciences NOTE: This work is available as an abstract only

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 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)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudent Research ProceedingsSame topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207