MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6969098545 · doi:10.5683/sp3/aze4er

Isotope data and associated attributes for 25 thermokarst lakes along the Inuvik – Tuktoyaktuk Highway, 2018

2022· dataset· en· W6969098545 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGeometric and Algebraic Topology
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermokarstWatershedSnowpackHydrology (agriculture)Surface waterDigital elevation modelStable isotope ratioDrainagePolygon (computer graphics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset contains water isotope concentrations measured from 25 lakes at five time points in 2018, along with snowpack and rainfall isotope concentrations from 2018. The lakes spanned a ~70km stretch of the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway (ITH). Rainfall samples were collected in Inuvik, while snowpack samples were collected within the vicinity of the Trail Valley Creek Research Station. The dataset also contains lake and watershed characteristics for the 25 lakes that were sampled for water isotope analysis. Lake-specific properties include surface area, watershed position, depth, latitude, longitude, and elevation, while watershed-specific properties include surface area, average hillslope angle, drainage density, and ice-wedge polygon coverage. Watersheds were delineated using a 2-metre resolution digital elevation model and the D8 algorithm. Within each watershed, the areas of ice-wedge polygons were identified visually from satellite imagery and digitized manually. Drainage density was calculated as the length of all flowpaths with a contributing area greater than 5000 m2, and then divided by the total area of the watershed.

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)0.002
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 score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.014

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealisSame topicGeometric and Algebraic TopologyFrench-language works237,207