MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4226390127 · doi:10.22215/etd/2022-14864

A statistical analysis of landfast sea ice breakout events at the northern floe edge of Admiralty Inlet, Nunavut

2022· dissertation· en· W4226390127 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Calder Patterson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersCrown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada
KeywordsBreakoutGeologySea iceInletClimatologyEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionOceanographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the spring, Inuit travel across landfast ice to the northern floe edge in Admiralty Inlet to hunt.During this time, the floe edge can be unstable, and floes can break free (I.e., breakout) from landfast ice, stranding hunters on mobile ice floes.To assess this risk, a climatology of breakout events from 2000-2020 was developed, which revealed that first events in the spring now occur 46 days earlier and 6-7 more of these events now occur each year than two decades ago.Point-biserial correlations between past breakout events and meteorological variables from ECMWF's reanalysis dataset (ERA5) were calculated to explore potential associations.These yielded weak (|r| = 0.06-0.12)yet significant relationships to winds, rainfall, and snowfall.A logistic regression model to predict breakout timing outperformed climatology but had low skill.In situ observations of breakout events and environmental conditions near the floe edge are recommended to improve prediction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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