MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4245841868 · doi:10.5194/essd-2021-141-rc2

Comment on essd-2021-141

2021· peer-review· en· W4245841868 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostSpan (engineering)ArcticWetlandVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceBorealLand coverLatitudeHydrology (agriculture)Physical geographyAtmospheric sciencesLand useGeologyGeographyEcologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Methane (CH4) emissions from the boreal and arctic region are globally significant and highly sensitive to climate change. There is currently a wide range in estimates of high-latitude annual CH4 fluxes, where estimates based on land cover inventories and empirical CH4 flux data or process models (bottom-up approaches) generally are greater than atmospheric inversions (top-down approaches). A limitation of bottom-up approaches has been the lack of harmonization between inventories of site-level CH4 flux data and the land cover classes present in high-latitude spatial datasets. Here we present a comprehensive dataset of small-scale, surface CH4 flux data from 540 terrestrial sites (wetland and non-wetland) and 1247 aquatic sites (lakes and ponds), compiled from 189 studies. The Boreal–Arctic Wetland and Lake Methane Dataset (BAWLD-CH4) was constructed in parallel with a compatible land cover dataset, sharing the same land cover classes to enable refined bottom-up assessments. BAWLD-CH4 includes information on site-level CH4 fluxes but also on study design (measurement method, timing, and frequency) and site characteristics (vegetation, climate, hydrology, soil, and sediment types, permafrost conditions, lake size and depth, and our determination of land cover class). The different land cover classes had distinct CH4 fluxes, resulting from definitions that were either based on or co-varied with key environmental controls. Fluxes of CH4 from terrestrial ecosystems were primarily influenced by water table position, soil temperature, and vegetation composition, while CH4 fluxes from aquatic ecosystems were primarily influenced by water temperature, lake size, and lake genesis. Models could explain more of the between-site variability in CH4 fluxes for terrestrial than aquatic ecosystems, likely due to both less precise assessments of lake CH4 fluxes and fewer consistently reported lake site characteristics. Analysis of BAWLD-CH4 identified both land cover classes and regions within the boreal and arctic domain, where future studies should be focused, alongside methodological approaches. Overall, BAWLD-CH4 provides a comprehensive dataset of CH4 emissions from high-latitude ecosystems that are useful for identifying research opportunities, for comparison against new field data, and model parameterization or validation. BAWLD-CH4 can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18739/A2DN3ZX1R (Kuhn et al., 2021).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.856

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0200.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4000.309

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→