MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6986395955

Physical gradient influences on sea ice algae in the Canadian Arctic

2018· dissertation· en· W6986395955 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Nuclear Safety CommissionChurchill Northern Studies CentreNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response Network
KeywordsSea iceArctic ice packBiomass (ecology)AlgaeArcticAntarctic sea iceDrift iceNutrientPrimary producersCurrent (fluid)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ice algae living within the bottom interstices of sea ice significantly contribute to the amount of the primary production in the Arctic Ocean in the late-winter/spring. This thesis examines the influence of physical gradients, namely sub-ice currents and riverine input, on ice algal concentration and composition during the spring bloom. Through two separate case studies, it was found that (i) increased sub-ice currents in tidal straits enhance nutrient supply to bottom ice, supporting greater ice algal biomass, (ii) improved mechanisms of nutrient supply were proposed that explain the increased biomass as a result of strong sub-ice currents, and (iii) freshwater inflow to the marine system also has a negative influence on biomass, reducing biomass associated with decreasing salinity. These findings will help identify new biological hotpots of ice algal production in the Arctic, while highlighting a negative, yet limited, influence surrounding hydroelectric controlled river output during winter.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→