Predictive mapping of organic carbon stocks in surficial sediments of the Canadian continental margin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Quantification and mapping of surficial seabed sediment organic carbon have wide-scale relevance for marine ecology, geology and environmental resource management, with carbon densities and accumulation rates being a major indicator of geological history, ecological function and ecosystem service provisioning, including the potential to contribute to nature-based climate change mitigation. While global analyses can appear to provide a definitive understanding of the spatial distribution of sediment carbon, regional maps may be constructed at finer resolutions and can utilise targeted data syntheses and refined spatial data products and therefore have the potential to improve these estimates. Here, we report a national systematic review of data on organic carbon content in seabed sediments across Canada and combine this with a synthesis and unification of the best available data on sediment composition, seafloor morphology, hydrology, chemistry and geographic settings within a machine learning mapping framework. Predictive quantitative maps of mud content, dry bulk density, organic carbon content and organic carbon density were produced along with cell-specific estimates of their uncertainty at 200 m resolution across 4 489 235 km2 of the Canadian continental margin (92.6 % of the seafloor area above 2500 m) (https://doi.org/10.5683/SP3/ICHVVA, Epstein et al., 2024). Fine-scale variation in carbon stocks was identified across the Canadian continental margin, particularly in the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean regions. Overall, we estimate the standing stock of organic carbon in the top 30 cm of surficial seabed sediments across the Canadian shelf and slope to be 10.9 Gt (7.0–16.0 Gt). Increased empirical sediment data collection and higher precision in spatial environmental data layers could significantly reduce uncertainty and increase accuracy in these products over time.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".