MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910343630 · doi:10.48380/fjnb-n692

The Earth Science Box Modeling Toolkit (ESBMTK)

2023· article· en· W6910343630 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuedggv-e-publications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPython (programming language)SolverModelicaEarth system scienceSoftware deploymentModeling language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Box modeling is a versatile tool to explore earth systems processes, ranging from transient changes in the marine carbonate system to the long-term evolution of biogeochemical cycles. The Earth Science Box Modeling Toolkit is a python based toolkit that allows for the rapid creation and deployment of box models. It abstracts typical modeling tasks, e.g., air-sea gas exchange, weathering, seafloor carbonate precipitation/dissolution, kinetic isotope fractionation, etc., to python classes. Class instances can then simply be combined to build a model. While there is no graphical interface, this approach significantly reduces coding complexity and model development time. Crucially, the model structure is independent of the numerical implementation. Instead the model is parsed to dynamically create the necessary equation systems that can be passed to ode solver libraries like ODEPACK. Separating model description from numerical implementation results in well-documented model code, and combines the computational efficiency of state-of-the-art numerical libraries with the ease of use of python. The efficiency of this process is demonstrated by a 12-box model with air-sea gas exchange, tracers for carbon isotopes, and water column carbonate chemistry that requires about 1 CPU second to calculate the model evolution over 30 million years.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuedggv-e-publicationsSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207