MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411672763 · doi:10.1175/wcas-d-24-0065.1

Evaluating Navigational Information and Data Needs to Support Safe Shipping in Canadian Arctic Waters

2025· article· en· W4411672763 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWeather Climate and Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Ottawa
FundersArcticNetSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response Network
KeywordsArcticEnvironmental scienceThe arcticEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceTransport engineeringOceanographyEngineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Vessel operators in the Canadian Arctic rely on accurate weather, water, ice, and climate (WWIC) information to make safe navigational decisions, particularly where sea ice is present. Despite the necessity of accurate WWIC information, it is currently unknown what services are being accessed by users on vessels in the Canadian Arctic, and to what extent user needs are being met by available WWIC services. User perspectives are crucial for developing meaningful WWIC services, yet there remains a gap between what service providers believe to be useful information and what users need and use for their decision-making. To address this gap, a mixed-methods online survey targeted individuals who use WWIC information while navigating in the Canadian Arctic onboard marine vessels of various sizes and types (e.g., general cargo vessels, pleasure craft, cruise ships). The results show that the needs of most respondents (61%) were met “frequently” by current WWIC services, but 63% said that their voyages would benefit from additional information and better services. Sea ice concentration was the most important WWIC factor identified to support safe navigation, followed by sea ice age/thickness, wind speed, wind direction, and then sea ice drift. The southern route of the Northwest Passage and the Arctic Ocean north of Ellesmere Island were consistently identified as areas where information was regularly inaccurate and where improvements are needed. Some of the recommended improvements for WWIC service delivery included the need for more frequent information updates, improving internet connectivity speed and satellite coverage, and more information offered in low-bandwidth formats. Significance Statement The purpose of this study is to better understand what weather, water, ice, and climate (WWIC) information vessel operators identify as a need to safely travel in the Canadian Arctic. This is important because vessel operators rely on accurate and accessible WWIC information for making safe navigation decisions, yet their needs are not always considered when creating WWIC services. Our results highlight what WWIC services are currently being used in the Canadian Arctic and make recommendations on what improvements are needed to support safe shipping in the region.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.262 · 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