MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Comment on egusphere-2022-1257

2023· peer-review· en· W4319942597 on OpenAlexaff
Sophie Wittig, Antoine Berchet, Isabelle Pison, Marielle Saunois, Joà l Thanwerdas, Adrien Martinez, Jean-Daniel Paris, Tochinobu Machida, Motoki Sasakawa, Douglas E. J. Worthy, Xin Lan, Rona L. Thompson, Espen Sollum, Michael Arshinov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasArcticAtmospheric sciencesCarbon footprintGlobal warmingClimatologyThe arcticMethaneInversion (geology)PermafrostClimate changeMeteorologyGeographyOceanographyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The Arctic is a critical region in terms of global warming. Environmental changes are already progressing steadily in high northern latitudes whereby, among other effects, a high potential of enhanced methane (CH4) emissions is induced. With CH4 being a potent greenhouse gas, additional emissions from Arctic regions may intensify global warming in the future by positive feedback. Various natural and anthropogenic sources are currently contributing to the Arctic’s CH4 budget; however the quantification of those emissions remains challenging. Assessing the amount of CH4 emissions in the Arctic and their contribution to the global budget still remains challenging. This is on the one hand due to the difficulties in carrying out accurate measurements in such remote areas. Besides, high variations in the spatial distribution of methane sources and a poor understanding of the effects of ongoing changes in carbon decomposition, vegetation and hydrology also complicate the assessment. Therefore, the aim of this work is to reduce uncertainties on current bottom-up estimates of CH4 emissions as well as soil oxidation by implementing an inverse modeling approach in order to better quantify CH4 sources and sinks for the most recent years (2008 to 2019). More precisely, the objective is to detect occurring trends in the CH4 emissions and potential changes in seasonal emission patterns. The implementation of the inversion included footprint simulations obtained with the atmospheric transport model FLEXPART, various emission estimates from inventories and land surface models as well as data of atmospheric CH4 concentrations from 42 surface observation sites in the Arctic nations. The results of the inversion showed that the majority of the CH4 sources currently present in high northern latitudes are poorly constrained by the existing observation network. Therefore, conclusions on trends and changes in the seasonal cycle could not be obtained for the corresponding CH4 sectors. Only CH4 fluxes from wetlands are adequately constrained, predominantly in North America. Within the period under study, wetland emissions show a slight negative trend in North America and a slight positive trend in East Eurasia. Overall, the estimated CH4 emissions are lower compared to the bottom-up estimates but higher than similar results from global inversions.

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)0.010
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: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0200.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3100.193

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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