MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399418174 · doi:10.1007/s11852-024-01052-3

Correction to: Assessing the impact of hurricane Fiona on the coast of PEI National Park and implications for the effectiveness of beach-dune management policies

2024· article· en· W4399418174 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robin Davidson‐Arnott, Jeff Ollerhead, Elizabeth George, Chris Houser, Bernard O. Bauer, Patrick A. Hesp, Ian J. Walker, Irene Delagado-Fernandez, Danika van Proosdij

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Coastal Conservation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusOkanagan University CollegeMount Allison UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of WindsorUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNational parkGeographyNature ConservationEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceArchaeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article has been published with incorrect captions for Figs. 7, 8 and 9. The correct figures and captions are presented below. (Figure presented.) (Figure presented.) (Figure presented.) ERA5 hindcast significant wave height data offshore of Brackley Beach, for intense storms such as Hurricanes Dorian and Fiona, as well as recent Nor'easter storms in January of 2022 Significant wave height and water level data during Fiona. ERA5 is the plot of hourly estimates of wave height for the offshore hindcast point closest to Brackley Beach; Buoy Swh is the significant wave height (Hs) measured by Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s AZMP Viking wave buoy located between PEI and Îsles de la Madeleine; Gauge WL is water level measured by a still water gauge located on Lennox Island and operated by the PEI Storm Surge Early Warning System; and the tide predictions are provided by the Canadian Hydrographic Service for nearby Rustico Harbor, which is located approximately 4 km west of Brackley and 12 km east of Cavendish Examples of beach and dune management at Cavendish Beach: A) View looking east of the main beach at Cavendish in June 2016, two years after restoration began on a large blowout resulting from trampling next to the boardwalk access point. Repurposed Christmas trees are used as a substitute for sand fences to trap sand, and marram grass is planted in the area between the trees. Fencing was used to keep visitors off the regeneration area; B) View looking east of the beach in May 2022 showing the restored foredune on the right and virtual fencing along the high tide line to keep visitors away from the vegetation forming embryo dunes along the base of the stoss slope of the foredune. Signage, visible to the right of the buried tree trunk on the stoss slope, is used to inform visitors of the need to keep off the foredune The original article has been corrected.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.080
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.080
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1910.069

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Coastal ConservationSame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207