MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3161681827 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-944

Iceberg modelling with NEMO

2021· article· en· W3161681827 on OpenAlexaffabout
Juliana M. Marson, Paul G. Myers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIcebergOceanographySubmarine pipelineSea icePlumeOpen waterClimatologyMeteorologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Icebergs represent around half of the yearly mass discharge from the Greenland Ice Sheet. They are not only important freshwater sources, but also pose a threat to navigation and other offshore activities. Since monitoring individual icebergs in large numbers is unfeasible, numerical models are great tools to evaluate their role in freshwater distribution and their general trajectory patterns. While large-scale iceberg modelling is in its infancy, we show recent model improvements done in the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) iceberg module. Among those, we highlight a newly implemented iceberg-sea ice dynamic, where icebergs are locked in concentrated and strong sea ice packs, so they will move with sea ice instead of across it. Additionally, recent code modifications allow the user to choose if the iceberg melt plume is inserted in the ocean’s first model layer or distributed along the iceberg draft. Results will show if these code upgrades change the way freshwater is distributed in the ocean and if they better represent iceberg trajectories and their surge seasonality off the Labrador shelf.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→