MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367054220 · doi:10.1029/2022gb007657

Inland Water Greenhouse Gas Budgets for RECCAP2: 1. State‐Of‐The‐Art of Global Scale Assessments

2023· article· en· W4367054220 on OpenAlexaff
Ronny Lauerwald, George H. Allen, Bridget R. Deemer, Shaoda Liu, Taylor Maavara, Peter A. Raymond, Lewis Alcott, David Bastviken, Adam Hastie, Meredith A. Holgerson, Matthew S. Johnson, Bernhard Lehner, Peirong Lin, Alessandra Marzadri, Lishan Ran, Hanqin Tian, Xiao Yang, Yuanzhi Yao, Pierre Regnier

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersHORIZON EUROPE European Research CouncilNatural Environment Research CouncilNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaSvenska Forskningsrådet FormasMinistero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della RicercaEuropean CommissionAgence Nationale de la RechercheHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeUniverzita Karlova v PrazeDipartimenti di EccellenzaSight Research UKNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationVetenskapsrådetNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceWater cycleCarbon cycleMethaneScale (ratio)Carbon sequestrationSurface waterCarbon dioxideNitrous oxideAtmosphere (unit)Atmospheric sciencesHydrology (agriculture)ClimatologyMeteorologyEnvironmental engineeringGeographyOceanographyEcologyGeologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Inland waters are important emitters of the greenhouse gasses (GHGs) carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) to the atmosphere. In the framework of the 2nd phase of the REgional Carbon Cycle Assessment and Processes (RECCAP‐2) initiative, we review the state of the art in estimating inland water GHG budgets at global scale, which has substantially advanced since the first phase of RECCAP nearly 10 years ago. The development of increasingly sophisticated upscaling techniques, including statistical prediction and process‐based models, allows for spatially explicit estimates that are needed for regionalized assessments of continental GHG budgets such as those established for RECCAP. A few recent estimates also resolve the seasonal and/or interannual variability in inland water GHG emissions. Nonetheless, the global‐scale assessment of inland water emissions remains challenging because of limited spatial and temporal coverage of observations and persisting uncertainties in the abundance and distribution of inland water surface areas. To decrease these uncertainties, more empirical work on the contributions of hot‐spots and hot‐moments to overall inland water GHG emissions is particularly needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations85
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207