Paleoclimatology and Paleoceanography Perspectives on Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article is composed of three independent commentaries about the state of Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) principles (Goldman et al., 2021, https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10508554.1 ) in the AGU section paleoclimatology and paleoceanography (P&P), and a discussion on the opportunities and challenges of adopting them. Each commentary focuses on a different topic: (Section 2) Global collaboration, technology transfer and application, reproducibility, and data sharing and infrastructure; (Section 3) Local knowledge, global gain: improving interactions within the scientific community and with locals, indigenous communities, stakeholders, and the public; (Section 4) Field, experimental, remote sensing, and real‐time data research and application. P&P projects can better include ICON principles by directly incorporating them into research proposals. A promising way to overcome the challenges of interdisciplinarity and integration is to foster networking, which will advance our research discipline through the application of ICON.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".