Summer water temperature structures and their interannual variation in the upper Canada Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conductivity, temperature and depth (CTD) data from 1993-2010 are used to study water temperature in the upper Canada Basin. There are four kinds of water temperature structures: The remains of the winter convective mixed layer, the near-surface temperature maximum (NSTM), the wind-driven mixed layer, and the advected water under sea ice. The NSTM mainly appears within the conductive mixed layer that forms in winter. Solar heating and surface cooling are two basic factors in the formation of the NSTM. The NSTM can also appear in undisturbed open water, as long as there is surface cooling. Water in open water areas may advect beneath the sea ice. The overlying sea ice cools the surface of the advected water, and a temperature maximum could appear similar to the NSTM. The NSTM mostly occurred at depths 10-30 m because of its deepening and strengthening during summer, with highest frequency at 20 m. Two clear stages of interannual variation are identified. Before 2003, most NS TMs were observed in marginal ice zones and open waters, so temperature maxima were usually warmer than 0℃ After 2004, most NSTMs occurred in ice-covered areas, with much colder temperature maxima. Average depths of the temperature maxima in most years were about 20 m, except for about 16 m in 2007, which was related to the extreme minimum of ice cover. Average temperatures were around –0.8℃ to –1.1℃, but increased to around –0.5℃ in 2004, 2007 and 2009, corresponding to reduced sea ice. As a no-ice summer in the Arctic is expected, the NSTM will be warmer with sea ice decline. Most energy absorbed by seawater has been transported to sea ice and the atmosphere. The heat near the NSTM is only the remains of total absorption, and the energy stored in the NSTM is not considerable. However, the NSTM is an important sign of the increasing absorption of solar energy in seawater.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".