Spatial variability in carbon dioxide exchange processes within wet sedge meadows in the Canadian High Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wet sedge meadows are the most productive plant communities in the High Arctic. However, the controls on carbon dioxide (CO2) exchange processes within wet sedge communities – and the scale at which they operate – are poorly understood. Here, the factors controlling CO2 exchange of wet sedge meadows experiencing different moisture regimes are examined. Environmental data are used to create predictive models of CO2 exchange on multiple temporal scales. Automated chamber systems recorded CO2 fluxes at 30-minute intervals at wet sedge sites in the Canadian High Arctic from June to August in 2014 and 2015. Static chambers were also deployed over a larger spatial extent in 2014. Our results show that wet sedge communities were strong CO2 sinks during the growing season (−7.67 to −44.36 g C•m−2). CO2 exchange rates in wetter and drier areas within wet sedge meadows differed significantly (Wilcoxon, p Citation: Wright C M, Blaser A C, Treitz P M, et al. Spatial variability in carbon dioxide exchange processes within wet sedge meadows in the Canadian High Arctic. Adv Polar Sci, 2021, 32(1): 1-19, doi: 10.13679/j.advps.2020.0033
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".