Difference between revisions of "Category:Ice Cores Working Group"
(initial commit) |
(changed pic) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Working Group]] | [[Category:Working Group]] | ||
− | [[ | + | [[http://www.bl.uk/voices-of-science/britishlibrary/~/media/bl/websites/vos/images/interviewees/021i-c1379x0070xx-0001a1.jpg?backgroundColor=000000&as=false|thumb|right|alt=Air Bubbles trapped in Antarctic ice core|Credit: British Library]] |
== Overview == | == Overview == | ||
Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
For '''NEW DATASETS''': | For '''NEW DATASETS''': | ||
<poll> | <poll> | ||
− | Do you endorse X, Y Z as the three (and only three) essential metadata fields for datasets derived from | + | Do you endorse X, Y Z as the three (and only three) essential metadata fields for datasets derived from ice cores? |
Yes | Yes | ||
No | No | ||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
For '''LEGACY DATASETS''': | For '''LEGACY DATASETS''': | ||
<poll> | <poll> | ||
− | Do you endorse A, B C as the three (and only three) essential metadata fields for datasets derived from | + | Do you endorse A, B C as the three (and only three) essential metadata fields for datasets derived from ice cores? |
Yes | Yes | ||
No | No | ||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
<poll> | <poll> | ||
− | For | + | For ice cores, how old does a dataset have to be in order to qualify as 'legacy'? |
Pre-bomb | Pre-bomb | ||
Pre-historic | Pre-historic |
Revision as of 14:10, 20 September 2016
[Bubbles trapped in Antarctic ice core|Credit: British Library]
Contents
Overview
In the Linked Earth context, a working group (WG) is a self-organized coalition of knowledgeable experts, whose activities are governed herewith. This page is dedicated to the discussion of data and metadata standards for proxies based on glacier ice, and aims to formulate a set of recommendations for such a standard.
Members of 'Ice Cores Working Group'
This working group has 4 members.
Specific tasks
We recommend that discussions focus on the following considerations, and explore potential commonalities.
For each observation type, we recommend:
- structuring discussions around what scientific questions one would want to ask of the data
- listing essential, recommended, and optional information for:
- the measurements themselves
- any inference made from the measurements (e.g. calibration to temperature)
- the underlying uncertainties, and what those numbers correspond to (e.g. 1-sigma or 2-sigma?)
- providing an ideal data table, so the community knows what to report and how to report it.
- providing separate recommendations for new and legacy datasets, and for how to label measured and inferred variable (e.g. δD is measured, temperature is inferred)
- thinking about how the rest of the paleoscience community, or other (non)scientists may make use of the data you describe.
Ice core projects are inherently collaborative in nature, and have thus developed mechanisms for data exchange, including some form of standards. We do not ask this WG to re-invent the wheel; if these standards are defined somewhere, please copy/paste freely here.
A few categories worth thinking about:
Data Streams
Stable Water Isotopes
Ions =
Noble Gases
Borehole thermometry
Dust
Timescale
Timescale construction
Is there a unified way to report on timescale construction? Should there be? What does a user need to know about the timescale was constructed to make the best use of the data?
Uncertainties
How are uncertainties reported? Do they enable age-modeling software (e.g. GeoChronR) to generate age ensembles ? if not, how do you recommend archiving age ensembles?
Polls
Here are three example polls that the group might want to consider:
For NEW DATASETS:
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.
For LEGACY DATASETS:
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.
This category currently contains no pages or media.