MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406706224 · doi:10.3390/knowledge5010001

A Deterministic Model for Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB) Patterns Under Turing’s Instability Perspective

2025· article· en· W4406706224 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Tri Nguyen-Quang, Louis Labat, Qurat Ul An Sabir

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSlime Mold and Myxomycetes Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsBloomPerspective (graphical)InstabilityAlgal bloomComputer scienceTuringBiologyEcologyPhysicsArtificial intelligenceProgramming languagePhytoplankton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Turing’s instability has been widely introduced to explain the formation of several biological and ecological patterns, such as the skin patterning of fish or animals, wings of butterflies, pigmentation, and labyrinth patterns of the cerebral cortex of mammals. Such a mechanism may occur in the ecosystem due to the differential diffusion dispersal that happen if one of the constituent species results in the activator or the prey, showing a tendency to undergo autocatalytic growth. The diffusion of the constituent species activator is a random mobility function called passive diffusion. If the other species in the system (the predator/inhibitor) disperses sufficiently faster than the activator, then the spatially uniform distribution of species becomes unstable, and the system will settle into a stationary state. This paper introduced Turing’s mechanism in our reaction–taxis–diffusion model to simulate the harmful algal bloom (HAB) pattern. A numerical approach, the Runge–Kutta method, was used to deal with this system of reaction–taxis–diffusion equations, and the findings were qualitatively compared to the aerial patterns obtained by a drone flying over Torment Lake in Nova Scotia (Canada) during the bloom season of September 2023.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledgeSame topicSlime Mold and Myxomycetes ResearchFrench-language works237,207