MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403829700 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-76749-4

The projected exposure and response of a natural barrier island system to climate-driven coastal hazards

2024· article· en· W4403829700 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer A. Thomas, Patrick L. Barnard, Sean Vitousek, Li Erikson, Kai Parker, Kees Nederhoff, Kevin M. Befus, Manoochehr Shirzaei

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUnited Nations University Institute for Water, Environment, and Health
FundersNational Park ServiceU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsBarrier islandStormEnvironmental scienceShoreFlooding (psychology)Natural hazardHydrology (agriculture)Current (fluid)Natural (archaeology)Flood mythCoastal floodReturn periodGroundwaterOceanographyShoalCoastal erosionCoastal hazardsClimate changeGeologyGeographySea level rise

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accelerating sea level rise (SLR) and changing storm patterns will increasingly expose barrier islands to coastal hazards, including flooding, erosion, and rising groundwater tables. We assess the exposure of Cape Lookout National Seashore, a barrier island system in North Carolina (USA), to projected SLR and storm hazards over the twenty-first century. We estimate that with 0.5 m of SLR, 47% of current subaerial barrier island area would be flooded daily, and the 1-year return period storm would flood 74%. For 20-year return period storms, over 85% is projected to be flooded for any SLR. The modelled groundwater table is already shallow (< 2 m deep), and while projected to shoal to the land surface with SLR, marine flooding is projected to overtake areas with emergent groundwater. Projected shoreline retreat reaches an average of 178 m with 1 m of SLR and no interventions, which is over 60% of the current island width at narrower locations. Compounding these hazards is subsidence, with one-third of the study area currently lowering at > 2 mm/yr. Our results demonstrate the difficulty of managing natural barrier systems such as those managed by federal park systems tasked with maintaining natural ecosystems and protecting cultural resources.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207