MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200220495 · doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01657-0

Pollution in the Arctic Ocean: An overview of multiple pressures and implications for ecosystem services

2021· article· en· W4200220495 on OpenAlexaff
Bryony L. Townhill, Efstathios Reppas-Chrysovitsinos, Roxana Sühring, Crispin Halsall, Elena Mengo, Tina Sanders, Kirsten Dähnke, Odile Crabeck, Jan Kaiser, Silvana N.R. Birchenough

Bibliographic record

VenueAMBIO · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsArcticEnvironmental scienceEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeMarine ecosystemEcosystem servicesPollutantFishingEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic is undergoing unprecedented change. Observations and models demonstrate significant perturbations to the physical and biological systems. Arctic species and ecosystems, particularly in the marine environment, are subject to a wide range of pressures from human activities, including exposure to a complex mixture of pollutants, climate change and fishing activity. These pressures affect the ecosystem services that the Arctic provides. Current international policies are attempting to support sustainable exploitation of Arctic resources with a view to balancing human wellbeing and environmental protection. However, assessments of the potential combined impacts of human activities are limited by data, particularly related to pollutants, a limited understanding of physical and biological processes, and single policies that are limited to ecosystem-level actions. This manuscript considers how, when combined, a suite of existing tools can be used to assess the impacts of pollutants in combination with other anthropogenic pressures on Arctic ecosystems, and on the services that these ecosystems provide. Recommendations are made for the advancement of targeted Arctic research to inform environmental practices and regulatory decisions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations39
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAMBIOSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207