MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390115291 · doi:10.31223/x5f976

Dye tracing of upward brine migration in snow

2023· preprint· en· W4390115291 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robbie Mallett, Vishnu Nandan, Rosemary Willatt, Monojit Saha, John Yackel, Gaëlle Veysière, Jeremy Wilkinson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowBrineSnowpackSea iceGeologyBayOceanographyEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)GeomorphologyChemistryGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of salt in the snow overlying seasonal sea ice has profound thermodynamic and electromagnetic effects. However, the way that it arrives and is distributed within the marine snowpack remains poorly understood and modelled. We describe two experiments tracing upward brine movement in snow: one laboratory experiment at Rothera research station, West Antarctica, and a field experiment in Hudson Bay, Canada. The laboratory experiments involved the addition of dyed brine to the base of terrestrial snow samples, with subsequent wicking being characterised. After initial and total absorption at the base, the dyed brine migrated further up over nine days, ultimately reaching heights between 2.5 & 6 cm. Our field experiment involved dye being added directly (without brine) to bare sea ice and lake ice surfaces, with snow then accumulating on top over several days. On the sea ice, the dye migrated upwards into the snow by up to 5 cm as the snow's basal layer became more salty, whereas no dye migration occurred in our control experiment over lake ice. Upward dye migration and basal salinification over the sea ice occurred in relatively dry snowpacks where brine inclusions took up between 0.5 & 5.8% of the snow's pore volume.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→