MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527996289 · doi:10.7202/1000060ar

Late-Pleistocene and Holocene palynology in southeastern Québec

2010· article· en· W1527996289 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
R J Mott

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie physique et Quaternaire · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiocarbon datingHolocenePalynologyPollenPleistoceneDeciduousGeologyWoodlandVegetation (pathology)TundraEcologyGeographyPhysical geographyPaleontologyArcticOceanographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several relative and absolute pollen profiles from the Appalachian Region outline the vegetational history of the region. The earliest reliable date of 11,200 radiocarbon years BP, from the watershed area of the Mégantic Hills on the Québec-Maine border, dates the spruce pollen maximum, indicative of spruce woodland conditions. A second site in the same area shows tundra conditions existed prior to this time, but no radiocarbon dates are available to indicate the length of time these conditions persisted. About 10,000 radiocarbon years BP or less, the character of the vegetation changed and closed forest conditions prevailed. Spruce was still present, but balsam fir and birch increased and other deciduous species appeared. The continued increase in thermophilous deciduous species and hemlock and white pine during early- and mid-Holocene resulted in forests in which these taxa were more prominent than at present. An increase in spruce and decline in thermophilous taxa in the last few millenia produced the extant forests types.

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations59
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéographie physique et QuaternaireSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207