MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392617722 · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642001

DeepSee: Multidimensional Visualizations of Seabed Ecosystems

2024· preprint· en· W4392617722 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adam Coscia, H. M. Sapers, Noah Deutsch, Malika Khurana, John S. Magyar, Sergio Parra, Daniel R. Utter, Rebecca L. Wipfler, David W. Caress, Éric Martin, J. B. Paduan, Maggie Hendrie, Santiago Lombeyda, Hillary Mushkin, Alex Endert, Scott Davidoff, Victoria J. Orphan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesSchmidt Ocean InstituteCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryNuclear Safety and Security CommissionCenter for Dark Energy Biosphere InvestigationsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsWorkflowSoftware deploymentSample (material)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceBiogeochemical cycleEarth scienceSeabedField (mathematics)Data scienceTeamworkWorkspaceSampling (signal processing)OceanographyEcologyGeographyGeologyTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scientists studying deep ocean microbial ecosystems use limited numbers of sediment samples collected from the seafloor to characterize important life-sustaining biogeochemical cycles in the environment. Yet conducting fieldwork to sample these extreme remote environments is both expensive and time consuming, requiring tools that enable scientists to explore the sampling history of field sites and predict where taking new samples is likely to maximize scientific return. We conducted a collaborative, user-centered design study with a team of scientific researchers to develop DeepSee, an interactive data workspace that visualizes 2D and 3D interpolations of biogeochemical and microbial processes in context together with sediment sampling history overlaid on 2D seafloor maps. Based on a field deployment and qualitative interviews, we found that DeepSee increased the scientific return from limited sample sizes, catalyzed new research workflows, reduced long-term costs of sharing data, and supported teamwork and communication between team members with diverse research goals.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207