MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139907449

Observational analysis of the double-diffusive convection in the deep Canada Basin

2015· article· en· W3139907449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xie Linglin

Bibliographic record

Venue海洋学报(英文版) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeothermal gradientConvectionDouble diffusive convectionAbyssal plainFlux (metallurgy)Deep seaHeat fluxTemperature salinity diagramsAbyssal zoneStructural basinSalinityMineralogyGeophysicsGeomorphologyHeat transferNatural convectionOceanographyMeteorologyMechanicsChemistryRayleigh numberPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canada Basin(CB) is the largest sub-basin in the Arctic, with the deepest abyssal plain of 3 850 m. The double-diffusive process is the possible passage through which the geothermal energy affects the above isolated deep waters. With the temperature-salinity-pressure observations in 2003, 500-m-thick transition layers and lower1 000-m-thick bottom homogenous layers were found below 2 400 m in the central deep CB. Staircases with downward-increasing temperature and salinity are prominent in the transition layers, suggesting the doublediffusive convection in deep CB. The interface of the stairs is about 10 m thick with 0.001–0.002°C temperature difference, while the thicknesses of the homogenous layers in the steps decrease upward from about 60 to 20 m.The density ratio in the deep central CB is generally smaller than 2, indicating stronger double-diffusive convection than that in the upper ocean of 200–400 m. The heat flux through the deepest staircases in the deep CB varies between 0.014 and 0.031 W/m2, which is one-two orders smaller than the upper double-diffusive heat flux,but comparable to the estimates of geothermal heat flux.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.140 · 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 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue海洋学报(英文版)Same topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207