MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1946317024 · doi:10.1002/2015jf003580

Reconciling the ICE‐6G_C reconstruction of glacial chronology with ice sheet dynamics: The cases of Greenland and Antarctica

2015· article· en· W1946317024 on OpenAlex
G.R. Stuhne, W. R. Peltier

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Earth Surface · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIce sheetIce-sheet modelGlacial periodGeologyIce streamIce coreLast Glacial MaximumPhysical geographyClimatologyPaleontologyCryosphereGeomorphologySea iceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We describe a theoretical and numerical framework that has been developed to investigate the compatibility of the ICE‐6G_C reconstruction of the glaciation histories of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets with the latest understanding of ice physics. The ICE‐6G_C reconstruction has been produced solely on the basis of the theory of the glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) process, and it has remained an issue as to whether such reconstructions of the time‐dependent thickness variations of grounded continental ice sheets were compatible with physics‐based ice mechanical considerations. Our analyses focus on the evolution over the last glacial cycle of these extent ice sheet complexes and demonstrate that the GIA‐inferred models are entirely consistent with such considerations when uncertainties in (net) mass balance history are taken fully into account.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.249 · 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