Seafloor pockmarks offshore Vancouver Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pockmarks are crater-like depressions of erosive nature in marine or lacustrine sediments. They are often interpreted as the surface manifestation of hydrocarbon venting but may also result from freshwater flow in coastal regions, compaction induced sediment dewatering, or bottom scouring around natural or anthropogenic objects. Hence, they can be of relevance for the global carbon cycle, offshore infrastructure, benthic life, and slope stability. New bathymetric data from offshore Vancouver Island, Canada, indicate the presence of a huge pockmark field that had escaped attention in previous studies. The pockmarks are located between 100 and 200 mt depth around the head of Barkley Canyon. Owing to the presence of a large cabled underwater observatory related to the canyon, a wealth of multi-resolution and multi-disciplinary seafloor data is available from the pockmark field. Available data include multibeam surveys, seafloor video footage, seismic and EK60 echo-sounder profiles, and multibeam water-column information. First results from seafloor mapping indicate that the pockmark field consists of several thousands of pockmarks. By applying workflows that automatically map the pockmarks in digital elevation models, we are able to quantitatively investigate their morphology and spatial distribution. The pockmarks range in size between 100 - 500 m², with some exceptions as large as 900 m². Their mean depth varies between 0.5 - 2 m. Seepage of gas from the seafloor is well known from the area but could not yet been directly associated with the pockmark depressions. Instead, limited video footage from the seafloor indicate that at least some depressions host meter-sized boulders within their craters. We will next investigate possible temporal changes in pockmark morphology and seep activity by individual analysis of datasets that have been repeatedly collected between 2010-2020. By resolving pockmark morphologies and seep activities on an annual time-scale over a decade, the results will hopefully add a level of detail to our understanding of pockmark formation and seep activity within one of North Americas largest pockmark fields.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".