MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187239567 · doi:10.1029/2020rg000715

Reanalysis in Earth System Science: Toward Terrestrial Ecosystem Reanalysis

2021· article· en· W3187239567 on OpenAlexaff
Roland Baatz, Harrie‐Jan Hendricks Franssen, E. S. Euskirchen, Debjani Sihi, Michael C. Dietze, Stefano Ciavatta, Katja Fennel, Hylke E. Beck, Gabriëlle De Lannoy, Valentijn Pauwels, Ann Raiho, Carsten Montzka, Mathew Williams, Umakant Mishra, Christian Poppe Terán, Steffen Zacharias, Angela Lausch, Luis Samaniego, Kris Van Looy, Heye Bogena, Mihai Adamescu, Michael Mirtl, A. M. Fox, Klaus Goergen, Bibi S. Naz, Yijian Zeng, Harry Vereecken

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews of Geophysics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilEuropean CommissionSight Research UK
KeywordsEarth system scienceBiogeochemical cycleEnvironmental scienceData assimilationTerrestrial ecosystemEcosystemCarbon cycleAbiotic componentGlobal changeClimatologyEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeEcologyMeteorologyOceanographyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A reanalysis is a physically consistent set of optimally merged simulated model states and historical observational data, using data assimilation. High computational costs for modeled processes and assimilation algorithms has led to Earth system specific reanalysis products for the atmosphere, the ocean and the land separately. Recent developments include the advanced uncertainty quantification and the generation of biogeochemical reanalysis for land and ocean. Here, we review atmospheric and oceanic reanalyzes, and more in detail biogeochemical ocean and terrestrial reanalyzes. In particular, we identify land surface, hydrologic and carbon cycle reanalyzes which are nowadays produced in targeted projects for very specific purposes. Although a future joint reanalysis of land surface, hydrologic, and carbon processes represents an analysis of important ecosystem variables, biotic ecosystem variables are assimilated only to a very limited extent. Continuous data sets of ecosystem variables are needed to explore biotic‐abiotic interactions and the response of ecosystems to global change. Based on the review of existing achievements, we identify five major steps required to develop terrestrial ecosystem reanalysis to deliver continuous data streams on ecosystem dynamics.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations77
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews of GeophysicsSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207