MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3176506165 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-92813-9

Impact of model resolution on the representation of the wind field along Nares Strait

2021· article· en· W3176506165 on OpenAlexafffund
G. W. K. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsDairy Farmers of OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArcticGeologyClimatologyOceanographyCurrent (fluid)The arcticWind speedSea ice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nares Strait is a major pathway along which multi-year sea ice leaves the Arctic, an ice class that has seen a recent dramatic reduction in extent. The winds that blow along the strait play an important role in modulating this ice export as well as in establishing the Arctic's largest and most productive polynya, the North Water, that forms at its southern terminus. However, its remote location has limited our knowledge of the winds along the strait. Here we use automatic weather station data from Hans Island, in the middle of the strait, to assess the ability of a set of atmospheric renalyses and analyses with a common lineage but with varying horizontal resolution to represent the variability in the wind field. We find that the flow is highly bidirectional, consistent with topographic channeling, with the highest wind speeds from the north and that a model resolution of ~ 9 km is required to capture the observed variability. The wind field at Hans Island is also found to be representative of variability in the flow along much of Nares Strait.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→