MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378834916 · doi:10.5194/essd-2023-7

Meteorological, snow and soil data, CO <sub>2</sub> , water and energy fluxes, from a low-Arctic valley in the forest-tundra ecotone of Northern Quebec

2023· preprint· en· W4378834916 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Georg Lackner, Florent Dominé, Denis Sarrazin, Daniel F. Nadeau, Maria Belke‐Brea

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsTakuvik Joint International LaboratoryUniversité LavalWilfrid Laurier UniversityMakivik Corporation
FundersFondation BNP ParibasEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Polaire Français Paul Emile VictorHorizon 2020Compute Canada
KeywordsTundraEcotoneEnvironmental scienceSnowArcticVegetation (pathology)TaigaBorealEddy covarianceBlack sprucePhysical geographyShrubArctic vegetationClimatologyEcosystemGeographyEcologyForestryOceanographyGeologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. As the vegetation in the Arctic changes, tundra ecosystems along the southern border of the Arctic are becoming greener and gradually giving way to boreal ecosystems. This change is affecting local populations, wildlife, energy exchange processes between environmental compartments, and the carbon cycle. To understand the progression and the implications of this change in vegetation, satellite measurements and surface models can be employed. However, in situ observational data are required to validate these measurements and models. This paper presents observational data from two nearby sites in the forest–tundra ecotone in the Tasiapik Valley near Umiujaq in Northern Quebec, Canada. One site is on a mixture of lichen and shrub tundra. The associated data set comprises 9 years of meteorological, soil and snow data as well as 3 years of eddy covariance data. The other site, 850 m away, features vegetation consisting mostly of tall shrubs and black spruce. For that location, 6 years of meteorological, soil and snow data are available. In addition to the data from the automated stations, profiles for snow density and specific surface area were collected during field campaigns. The data are available at https://doi.org/10.1594/PANGAEA.946538 (Lackner et al., 2022b).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→