MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1990446902 · doi:10.1029/2009jf001331

Dynamics and mass balance of Taylor Glacier, Antarctica: 3. State of mass balance

2009· article· en· W1990446902 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey L. Kavanaugh, Kurt M. Cuffey, D. L. Morse, Andrew Bliss, S. Aciego

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlacierGeologyGlacier mass balanceAccumulation zoneSnowGlacier ice accumulationIce streamAblation zoneIce coreIce sheetClimatologyGeomorphologyCryosphereSea ice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taylor Glacier flows from the East Antarctic Ice Sheet and terminates in the McMurdo Dry Valleys, where it has left a geomorphologic record of past incursions. Here we use new data on the flow, thickness, and surface balance of Taylor Glacier to calculate ice fluxes and assess the current state of mass balance. Overall, the glacier is close to a state of zero net balance, and has largely adjusted to reduced snowfall on the Taylor Dome source region in the mid Holocene. One region of the upper ablation zone appears to be losing mass. Evidence from ice surface morphology and stable isotope profiles suggests that this mass loss is a long‐term phenomenon, hence probably a lingering response to the earlier drying of Taylor Dome. Our data give a general indication of the size of ablation or accumulation changes needed for ice to advance far into Taylor Valley, as occurred 70 to 130 ka ago.

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→