MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386936188 · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2023.09.005

Water chemistry and physical gradients across the coastal band of eastern Georgian Bay: A coherent habitat template

2023· article· en· W4386936188 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
E. Todd Howell, Claire Holeton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Great Lakes Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and environmental studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOceanographyBayShoreHabitatSubmarine pipelineGeologyWater qualityEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 125 km long archipelago of islands, reefs and embayments composing the coastline of eastern Georgian Bay connects the adjacent watersheds of the Canadian Shield with the calcareous basin of Lake Huron resulting in gradients of nutrients, major ions, alkalinity-pH, DOC and water transparency. An investigation of the broad distribution of these gradients, extending over four regions of coastline and the 60 km of shoreline from 2014 to 2016 indicated that this onshore-offshore transition in water quality is a predictable feature of the nearshore stemming from the underlying geological transition from land to lake. Consolidating the onshore to offshore gradient is the quasi-channelized nature of mixing across the highly dissected coastal band that adds to the persistence of mixing areas. In addition to water quality, the coastal gradient also encompasses a broad range of physical attributes of the aquatic environment including the thermal, optical, exposure regimes and the physical character of lakebed substrate. Consequently, we hypothesize that diverse forms of aquatic life can be anticipated to select and preferentially distribute across the habitat template embodied by the gradients that span the coastal band of eastern Georgian Bay.

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)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Great Lakes ResearchSame topicMarine and environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207