A Sault-outlet-referenced mid- to late-Holocene paleohydrograph for Lake Superior constructed from strandplains of beach ridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The most detailed Lake Superior paleohydrograph relative to the current outlet near Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario–Michigan, was constructed from four strandplains of beach ridges. This provides a history of water-level, glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA), and the active outlet prior to monitoring and regulation. Four relative paleohydrographs that are offset and subparallel owing to differences in GIA were produced from 321 basal foreshore elevations and 56 optically stimulated luminescence ages. Subtracting modeled elevations in defined millennial lake phases between relative paleohydrographs and similarity between an inferred Sault Ste. Marie (hereinafter, Sault) paleohydrograph and data near the zero isobase corroborates rates of GIA derived from water-level gauges. A change in trend in the Sault paleohydrograph is related to the final separation of Lake Superior from Lakes Michigan and Huron and is the youngest age reported at 1060 ± 100 years. A near-horizontal trend in the Sault paleohydrograph for the past millennium has an intercept that is close to the historical average for Lake Superior. A consistently linear trend from about 2 to 1 ka suggests a relatively stable outlet similar to the past millennium, but a decreasing trend from 3 to 1 ka suggests an outlet other than the Sault. Although intercept data beyond the last millennium are similar in elevation to the reported bedrock sill near Chicago (Hansel et al. 1985), we argue that the Port–Huron outlet was the active outlet during this time and the inferred paleohydrograph of Baedke and Thompson (2000) requires reevaluation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".