MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6963138084 · doi:10.17632/jvxncggms9.1

Data for: A Revised Sea Level History for the Northern Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, Canada

2018· dataset· en· W6963138084 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2018
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiatoms and Algae Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiatomSalinitySedimentTable (database)QuaternarySediment coreSeawaterSea level

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Counts of diatom species from terrestrial and marine sediment basins. The table documents counts of diatom species identified from sediment cores recovered from Quadra and Read islands, British Columbia, Canada. From Quaternary Science Review submission: Observed diatom floras were compared to those identified in Campeau et al. (1999), Cumming et al. (1995), Falu et al. (2000), Foged (1981), Hein (1990), Kelly et al. (2005), Pienitz et al. (2003) and Spaulding et al. (2010). Following Hustedt (1953), diatoms were assigned to five salinity classes: 1 - halophobian (fresh, salt intolerant), 2 - oligohalobous indifferent (freshwater), 3 - oligohalobous halophilous (freshwater species tolerant of salinity to 0.2 ppt), 4 - mesohalobous (brackish water species with optimal salinity between 0.2 and 30 ppt) and 5 - polyhalobous (marine water species with optimal salinity greater than 30 ppt).The salinity tolerance of identified floras was determined using the latter diatom flora references and data from Denys (1992), Guiry and Guiry (2017), Hustedt (1953), Marohasy and Abbot (2007), Wilson et al. (1996) and Zong and Sawai (2015)

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.017
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1100.032

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicDiatoms and Algae ResearchFrench-language works237,207