Arctic Coastal Dynamics : Report of the 3rd International Workshop, University of Oslo (Norway), 2-5 December 2002
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic Coastal Dynamics (ACD) is a joint project of the International Arctic Sciences Committee (IASC) and the International Pennafrost Association.Its overall objective is to improve our understanding of circum-Arctic coastal dynamics as a function of environmental forcing, coastal geology and cryology and mosphodynamic behavior.The third IASC-sponsored ACD workshop was held in Oslo, Norway, on December 2-5, 2002.Pasticipants from Canada (3), Germany (3), Great Bsitain (1), the Netherlands (1), Norway (6), Russia (1 l), Switzerland (1) and the United States (2) attended.The objective of the workshop was to review the Status of ACD according to the Science and Implementation Plan, with the main focus on the quantitative assessment of the sediment and organic carbon input to the Arctic Ocean through coastal erosion.Dusing the first past of the workshop, 29 Papers dealing with regional andlor circum-Arctic coastal dynamics were presented.Based on the material presented, three regional working groups and two circum-Arctic working groups were organized.The main task of the regional working groups was to continue previous efforts to Segment and classify the coast for their sectors.The coastal segmentation and classification is the basis for the assessment of the sediment and organic carbon input through coastal erosion.The circum-Arctic working groups focused On GIS development and extraction and presentation of environmental data, respectively.Finally, the results of the workshop and the next steps were discussed in the ACD Steering Committee meeting.The present report summarizes the program of the Arctic Coastal Dvnainics -Report of the 3"' International Workshop * produce a series of thematic and derived maps (e.g.coastal classification, ground-ice, sensitivity etc.);The project elements were formulated at a workshop in Woods Hole in November 1999 cassied out under the auspices of the International Pesmafrost Association (IPA), its working group on Coastal and Offshore Permafrost and its Coastal Erosion subgroup (Brown and Solomon 2000).As a result of the workshop a metadata form for the selection and establishment of key monitoring sites was developed.A consistent and generalized coastal classification scheme was established based on morphology and matesials.Consensus was reached On direct and indirect methodologies for estimating ground-ice volumes and presentations of data on maps.Finally, a suite of standard tools and techniques for development of long-term coastal monitosing sites was recommended.Dunng the Arctic Science Summit Week in April 2000 in Cambridge, UK, and at the request of the P A , the Council of the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) approved funding for a follow up workshop to develop a Science and Implementation Plan for ACD.The resulting international workshop, held in Potsdam (Gesmany) on 18-20 October 2000, produced a phased, five-year Science and Implementation Plan (Figure 2).The pasticipants selected Volker Rachold to be the official IASC Project Leader.Hans Hubbesten, Head of the AWI Potsdam Depastment, agreed to establish an ACD project office at AWI-Potsdam with a secretasiat headed by Volker Rachold to maintain international communications including the web site (http://www.awi-potsdam.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".