Data reporting and sharing for ocean alkalinity enhancement research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Effective management of data is essential for successful ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) research, as it guarantees the long-term preservation, interoperability, discoverability, and accessibility of data. OAE research generates various types of data, such as discrete bottle measurements, autonomous measurements from surface underway and uncrewed platforms (e.g., moorings, Saildrones, gliders, Argo floats), physiological response studies (e.g., laboratory, mesocosm, and field experiments, and natural analogues), and model outputs. This paper addresses data and metadata standards for all these types of OAE data. As part of this study, existing data standards have been updated to accommodate OAE research needs, and a completely new physiological response data standard has been introduced. Additionally, an existing ocean acidification metadata template has been upgraded to be applicable to OAE research. This paper also presents controlled vocabularies for OAE research, including types of OAE studies, source materials for alkalinization, platforms, and instruments. These guidelines will aid OAE researchers in preparing their metadata and data for submission to permanent archives. Finally, the paper provides information about available data assembly centers that OAE researchers can utilize for their data needs. The guidelines outlined in this paper are applicable to ocean acidification research as well.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it