MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1597239205 · doi:10.7202/005659ar

A Late Middle Pleistocene Climatic Cycle in Southern Italy Inferred From Pollen Analysis and Tephrostratigraphy of the Acerno Lacustrine Succession

2002· article· en· W1597239205 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paola Petrosino, Paola Romano, Elda Russo Ermolli, Étienne Juvigné

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie physique et Quaternaire · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPleistocenePaleontologyGlacial periodEarly PleistoceneInterglacialStadialSequence (biology)PalynologyStructural basinTephraEcological successionPollenEcologyVolcanoBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Acerno lacustrine basin represents a tectonic palaeolake formed in the southern Apennines during the Middle Pleistocene. Pollen analysis performed on the lacustrine sequence (about 100 m thick) allows the vegetation history to be reconstructed and correlated with a late Middle Pleistocene interglacial-glacial cycle. Interglacial conditions are evidenced by a rich oak forest phase while the glacial period is highlighted by a sharp decrease in all arboreal taxa and by the contemporaneous increase in herbaceous and steppe elements. The absence of subtropical elements such as cf. Taxodium and Carya throughout the sequence suggests a late Middle Pleistocene age on the basis of comparison with the nearby Vallo di Diano palaeolacustrine basin where these elements survived until the end of isotopic stage 13. Analysis of the thickest tephra layers identified throughout the sequence provide further constraints to better define its chronological position which is correlated with isotopic stages 9 and 8 by the presence of the Lower WTT (White Trachytic Tuff) marker level, dated 297 000 yr BP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations48
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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