Size, shape and spatial arrangement of mega‐scale glacial lineations from a large and diverse dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Mega‐scale glacial lineations (MSGLs) are a characteristic landform on ice stream beds. Solving the puzzle of their formation is key to understanding how ice interacts with its bed and how this, in turn, influences the dynamics of ice streams. However, a comprehensive and detailed characterization of this landform's size, shape and spatial arrangement, which might serve to test and refine formational theories, is largely lacking. This paper presents a detailed morphometric analysis and comparison of 4043 MSGLs from eight palaeo‐ice stream settings: three offshore (Norway and Antarctica), four onshore (Canada), and one from under a modern ice stream in West Antarctica. The length of MSGLs is lower than previously suggested (mode 1000–2000 m; median 2892 m), and they initiate and terminate at various locations on an ice stream bed. Their spatial arrangement reveals a pattern that is characterized by an exceptional parallel conformity (80% of all mapped MSGLs have an azimuth within 5° from the mean values), and a fairly constant lateral spacing (mode 200–300 m; median 330 m), which we interpret as an indication that MSGLs are a spatially self‐organized phenomenon. Results show that size, shape and spatial arrangement of MSGLs are consistent both within and also generally between different ice stream beds. We suggest this results from a common mechanism of formation, which is largely insensitive to local factors. Although the elongation of MSGLs (mode 6–8; median 12.2) is typically higher than features described as drumlins, these values and those of their width (mode 100–200 m; median 268 m) overlap, which suggests the two landforms are part of a morphological continuum and may share a similar origin. We compare their morphometry with explicit predictions made by the groove‐ploughing and rilling instability theories of MSGL formation. Although the latter was most compatible, neither is fully supported by observations. © 2014 The Authors. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".