MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6958025826 · doi:10.60692/j6mnm-5vs62

The 2014-17 Global Coral Bleaching Event: The Most Severe and Widespread Coral Reef Destruction

2022· article· en· W6958025826 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoybean genetics and cultivation
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoral bleachingCoral reefReefEnvironmental issues with coral reefsCoralResilience of coral reefsGlobal warmingClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ocean warming is increasing the incidence, scale, and severity of global-scale coral bleaching and mortality, culminating in the third global coral bleaching event that occurred during record marine heatwaves of 2014-2017. While local effects of these events have been widely reported, the global implications remain unknown. Analysis of 15,066 reef surveys during 2014-2017 revealed that 80% of surveyed reefs experienced significant coral bleaching and 35% experienced significant coral mortality. The global extent of significant coral bleaching and mortality was assessed by extrapolating results from reef surveys using comprehensive remote-sensing data of regional heat stress. This model predicted that 51% of the world's coral reefs suffered significant bleaching and 15% significant mortality, surpassing damage from any prior global bleaching event. These observations demonstrate that global warming's widespread damage to coral reefs is accelerating and underscores the threat anthropogenic climate change poses for the irreversible transformation of these essential ecosystems.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicSoybean genetics and cultivationFrench-language works237,207