MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982371921 · doi:10.1016/s0033-5894(03)00087-5

Stratigraphy, fossils, and age of sediments at the upper pit of the Lost Chicken gold mine: new information on the late Pliocene environment of east central Alaska

2003· article· en· W1982371921 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Matthews, John A. Westgate, Lynn Ovenden, L. David Carter, Thomas D. Fouch

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsGeologyTephraPaleontologyFaunaStratigraphyBorealMacrofossilHoloceneEcologyVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The “upper pit” at the Lost Chicken placer gold mine in east central Alaska contains fossils that provide information on the flora and insect fauna of interior Alaska just before the onset of global cooling at 2.5 myr. Fossils come from sediments interbedded with the Lost Chicken tephra (dated at 2.9 ± 0.4 myr—early Late Pliocene) and portray the floodplain and valley of a small creek within a region dominated by a coniferous forest richer in genera and species than the present one. Climate was wetter and less continental, and there was probably little or no permafrost. At least one other Pliocene tephra (the Fortymile tephra) occurs at the site and is also associated with plant and insect fossils. Among these fossils are extinct plants and insects like those found at other Tertiary sites in northern Canada and Alaska. The Lost Chicken sequence is the same age as the Beaufort Formation on Meighen Island, more than 1000 km to the north. Like Lost Chicken, Meighen Island sediments contain fossils representing a diverse boreal environment. This shows that the latitudinal climate gradient during early Late Pliocene time was shallower than at present and the boreal forest had a far greater latitudinal span than now.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations38
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary ResearchSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207