Labrador Sea boundary currents and the fate of the Irminger Sea water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The general circulation of the Labrador Sea is studied with a dataset of 53 surface drifters drogued at 15 m and several hydrographic sections done in May 1997. Surface drifters indicate three distinct speed regimes: fast boundary currents, a slower crossover from Greenland to Labrador, and a slow, eddy-dominated flow in the basin interior. Mean Eulerian velocity maps show several recirculation cells located offshore of the main currents, in addition to the cyclonic circulation of the Labrador Sea. Above the northern slope of the basin, the surface drifters have two preferential paths: one between the 1000-m and 2000-m isobaths and the other close to the 3000-m isobath. The vertical shear estimated from CTD data supports the presence of two distinct currents around the basin. One current, more baroclinic, flows between the 1000-m and 2000-m isobaths. The other one, more barotropic, flows above the lower continental slope. The Irminger Sea Water carried by the boundary currents is altered as it travels around the basin. Profiling Autonomous Lagrangian Circulation Explorer (PALACE) floats that followed approximately the Irminger Sea Water in the Labrador Sea show signs of isopycnal mixing between the interior and the boundary current in summer–fall and convection across the path of the Irminger Sea Water in winter–spring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".