MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033615726

Reflection seismic indicators for submarine permafrost and gas hydrate distributions on the Canadian Arctic Beaufort Shelf

2021· other· en· W7033615726 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueHelmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (GEOMAR) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostClathrate hydrateArcticSubaerialSubmarine pipelineSubmarineBeaufort seaReflection (computer programming)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the last glaciation the Canadian Arctic Beaufort Shelf is subjected to marine transgression. From subaerial mean annual temperatures during terrestrial exposure of ≤ -20°C, thermal conditions changed up to present submarine bottom water temperatures near -1°C. While conditions during the Pliocene favoured extensive formation of permafrost and gas hydrates, present occurrences are exposed to degradation due to the warmer climate. Today, submerged offshore permafrost is still responding to this thermal change. Ongoing degradation creates the potential of methane release of previously trapped biogenic gas within the relic permafrost and from gas hydrate dissociation. The mobilisation of methane and its possible release to the atmosphere plays a significant role in climate change. Yet, both the extent of permafrost and underlying gas hydrates is still poorly known. Here, we present seismic indicators for offshore permafrost and gas hydrates in 2D multichannel reflection seismic data acquired in the Canadian Beaufort Sea. Seismic lines that run from the shallow shelf towards deeper water show layer-crossing reflections that become gradually shallower towards the north-west into deeper water. These reflections show an amplitude-varying characteristic and are phase-reversed. We first use shot gathers from a synthetic model based on the field seismic acquisition characteristics and borehole geophysical data to verify our general ability to detect permafrost-and gas hydrate-related reflections. The synthetic data were processed using the same data processing applied to the field data and reveal clear top and base of permafrost and gas hydrate reflections. With this encouraging result, we can exclude any potentially misleading processing artefacts in the field seismic data. We interpret the amplitude-varying, phase-reversed and layer-crossing reflections seen in the field data as seismic indicators for the base of permafrost and base of gas hydrates. In contrast to the synthetic data, top of permafrost and top of gas hydrates are not clearly identified in the field data. However, additional seismic indicators support the interpretation of the presence of permafrost including attenuation of acoustic penetration and velocity pull-up effects at presumably horizontal strata. Furthermore, strong amplitude variations beneath the current base of gas hydrates and bright spots indicate trapped free gas accumulations from possible previously dissociated gas hydrates.

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)0.000
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHelmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (GEOMAR)Same topicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomyFrench-language works237,207