MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1925406554 · doi:10.7202/013734ar

River Incision in Relation to Post-Glacial Events in the Humber River Basin, Ontario

2006· article· en· W1925406554 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Roger T.J. Phillips, André Robert

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie physique et Quaternaire · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyDeglaciationStructural basinTerrace (agriculture)Glacial periodHoloceneDrainage basinRadiocarbon datingGeomorphologyContext (archaeology)PaleontologyArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

River valleys in the Humber River drainage basin have derived most of their morphology from processes occurring over the last 13 000 14C BP. Some of the valley reaches possess very distinct characteristics in terms of plan-view morphology, such as valley meandering and loop features along the valley sides. In this study, the valley morphology and stratigraphy of the upper Humber River basin are examined in order to assess the character of post-glacial valley evolution. Existing knowledge of late Wisconsinan and Holocene events has been considered to place this valley evolution into a regional context. Radiocarbon dating and digital elevation models suggest that the majority of valley incision occurred during or soon after regional deglaciation. Looping valley features and terrace patterns indicate that most valley morphology can be attributed to larger ancestral rivers. Although direct melt-water contributions are expected due to deglaciation, it is suggested that other processes due to the climatic and hydrogeologic effects of fluctuating proglacial lake levels also played a role.

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)0.001
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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