MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1884049767 · doi:10.7202/032798ar

Fiord to Deep Sea Sediment Transfers along the Northeastern Canadian Continental Margin: Models and Data

2007· article· en· W1884049767 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
John T. Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie physique et Quaternaire · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsFjordGeologyGlacial periodOceanographyContinental shelfGlacierArcticSedimentSedimentationShoalGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Alaskan fiords, sedimentation rates are high; during a glacial advance fiord-basin sediments are transported to the ice front to form a shoal which reduces the calving rate. Thus, during successive glacial cycles, sediment is initially stored and then removed from fiord basins. In the fiords of eastern Baffin Island sedimentation rates are, and were, much lower (< 1000 Kg/m2 ka). and fiord-basin fills may span several glacial cycles. This hypothesis is in keeping with the relatively low sedimentation rates on the adjacent shelf (50 to 500 kg/m2 ka) and deep-sea plain (< = 50 kg/m2 ka). The advance of outlet glaciers through these arctic fiords may be explained by the in situ growth of a floating ice-shelf, grounded at the mouth of the fiord. The extent of late Foxe Glaciation in McBeth and ltirbilung fiords can be delimited by raised marine deltas (50-85 m asl) with 14C dates on in situ shells and whalebone of >54 ka. Holocene raised beaches are lower and date <10 ka. These data, plus the absence of tills in raised marine sections along the outer coast, make it difficult to extend grounded ice onto the shelf during the 18 ka global maximum. Piston cores from Tingin. ltirbilung and McBeth fiords vary between 4 and 11 m in length, but only sample a proportion of the total basin-fills.

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)0.001
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 score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations47
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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