MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393946256 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2024-5-ac2

Reply on RC2

2024· peer-review· en· W4393946256 on OpenAlexaffabout
Craig J. Brown

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Continental shelf sediments contain some of the largest stocks of organic carbon (OC) on Earth and play a vital role in influencing the global carbon cycle. Quantifying how much OC is stored in shelf sediments and determining its residence time is key to assessing how human activities can accelerate the process of OC remineralization into carbon dioxide. Spatial variations in terrestrial carbon stocks are well studied and mapped at high resolution, but our knowledge of the distribution of marine OC in different seafloor settings is still very limited, particularly in the highly dynamic and spatially variable shelf environments. The lack of knowledge reduces our ability to understand and predict how much and for how long oceans sequester CO2. In this study, we use high-resolution multibeam echosounder (MBES) data from the Eastern Shore Islands offshore Nova Scotia (Canada), combined with OC measurements from discrete samples, to assess the distribution of OC content in seafloor sediments. We derive three different spatial estimates of organic carbon: i) assuming a homogenous seafloor the carbon stock estimates were scaled to the entire study region; ii) using a high-resolution substrate map, the estimates were scaled to the areas of soft substrate only, and, finally, iii) using Empirical Bayesian Regression Kriging (EBRK) regression prediction within the area of soft substrate, carbon stock estimates in areas of soft substrate were refined to account for spatial variability in the concentration of OC. These three distinct spatial models yielded dramatically different estimates of average standing stock of OC in our study area, 1275, 259 and 203 Mt of OC respectively. Our study demonstrates that high-resolution mapping is critically important for improved estimates of OC stocks on continental shelves, and to the identification of carbon hotspots that need to be considered in seabed management and climate mitigation strategies.

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)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0230.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1670.127

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.327 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClinical Nutrition and Gastroenterology→French-language works237,207→