Water Properties and Diffusive Convection in the Canada Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to better understand diffusive convection (DC) and its role in the upper ocean dynamic environment and sea ice melting in the Canada Basin. Based on a moored dataset with 6737 profiles collected from August 2003 to August 2011 in the upper layer of the Canada Basin, DC between the warm and salty Atlantic Water (AW) and the colder and less salty Lower Halocline Water (LHW) were investigated. The moorings were designated at four stations: A, B, C, and D, located at the southwestern, southeastern, northeastern, and northwestern parts of the basin, respectively. During the observation period, the temperature, salinity, and depth of the AW and LHW exhibited unique temporal variations. The temperature and salinity of the AW varied among stations, with a decreasing trend from northwest to southeast, consistent with the propagation path of the AW in the Canada Basin. The temperature and salinity of the LHW were similar at all stations. The AW and LHW cores were located between depths of 320–500 m and 160–300 m, respectively, and both gradually deepened over time. Distinct DC staircase structures were observed between the AW and LHW, more pronounced at stations C and D than at stations A and B, which is speculated to be related to eddies at stations A and B during the observation period. The vertical heat fluxes through the DC staircase layer at stations C and D (FHc_C and FHc_D) were estimated using an empirical formula. FHc_C ranged from 0.05 to 0.94 W/m2, and FHc_D ranged from 0.05 to 0.6 W/m2, with the maximum probability value for both at approximately 0.2 W/m2. The effective diffusivities at these two stations (KT_C and KT_D) are similar, ranging from 2 × 10−6 to 3 × 10−5 m2/s, with the highest probability occurring at 6 × 10−6 m2/s. Both the probability density function of the heat flux and the effective diffusivity skewed towards larger values and obey a lognormal distribution, indicating turbulence intermittency of the DC staircase in the Canada Basin. These finding offers new insights into the heat transport and turbulence in the DC staircase, and then bring a deeper understanding of sea ice melting in the Canada Basin.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".