MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408824576 · doi:10.5194/oos2025-772

The need to explore the potential of marine CDR – A guide for policy makers

2025· preprint· en· W4408824576 on OpenAlexaff
Philip W. Boyd, Jean‐Pierre Gattuso, Minhan Dai, Louis Legendre, Terre Satterfield, Romany Webb

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital and Cyber Forensics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limiting global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C in the midst of a climate emergency requires rapid, deep, and sustained emission reductions, alongside annual CDR at the billion-tonne (Gt) scale. CDR is essential for addressing hard-to-abate, residual emissions and reducing atmospheric CO₂. Achieving the billion-tonne CDR target demands a holistic approach that includes both land and ocean – which we term One-Earth CDR. One-Earth CDR is critical because all CDR methods face a "CDR tax" due to feedbacks from the human-altered Earth System. These feedbacks release stored anthropogenic CO₂ from land and ocean reservoirs, which partially offsets the effectiveness of CDR. Therefore, to reach the billion-tonne goal, CDR must be applied sustainably in all feasible environments. One-Earth CDR also serves as a safeguard against over-reliance on land-based CDR, which faces challenges such as side effects (e.g., mega-fires) and sustainability limits (e.g., land and water use). Marine CDR (mCDR) using innovative methods offers a large potential for carbon storage. Proving the effectiveness and safety of mCDR will likely take at least a decade. Ensuring its integrity is crucial for verifiable CDR. Before large-scale deployment, knowledge gaps must be addressed, including risks, sustainability, scalability, cost, permanence, side effects, monitoring, verification, social acceptance, and governance frameworks.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0160.039
Open science0.0070.012
Research integrity0.0200.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.022

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital and Cyber ForensicsFrench-language works237,207