MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393842925 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.6784489

Data on submerged aquatic vegetation and its water environment in Lake Saint-Pierre, Saint Lawrence River, from 2012 to 2016

2022· dataset· en· W4393842925 on OpenAlexaff
Morgan Botrel, Andrea Bertolo, Roxane Maranger

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSAINTHydrology (agriculture)Vegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceGeologyOceanographyArtGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset is the result of a large collaborative work lead by the GRIL from 2012 to 2015 on a submerged aquatic vegetation meadow located downstream of two agricultural tributaries (Saint-François and Yamaska rivers) in Lake Saint-Pierre, a fluvial lake of the Saint Lawrence River. The data describe plants (as rake biomass and echosounding) and their environment, including water chemistry, current velocity as well as light, temperature and instantaneous meteo. Only echosounding data are available in 2016 and sediments were collected in 2015. Data are organized as a relational database and the GRIL_LSP_database.png provides keys and links between tables as well as data format. Data are in the tables mesure_integree, mesure_spatiale, mesure_verticale, plante_biomass_taxon, plante_recolte, plante_in_situ. The other tables are metadata about spatiotemporal locations and reported measures. Additional data (e.g. zooplankton, sediments) should eventually be made available and associated to this overall GRIL dataset.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.016

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207