MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990837892 · doi:10.3189/172756502781831638

Altitudinal variation of the stable isotopes of snow in regions of high relief

2002· article· en· W1990837892 on OpenAlexafffundabout
G. Holdsworth, H. Roy Krouse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Glaciology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsGeologyAltitude (triangle)SnowClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A major discontinuity in the variation of δ 18 O ( δ D) with altitude in high mountains was first seen in data from Mount Logan, YukonTerritory, Canada (Holdsworth and others, 1991). The profile of δ vs altitude revealed three well-defined regions: (1) a lower, monotonic, fractionation sequence below ∼3 km; (2) a middle layer, typically 1–2 km thick, within which δ values are nearly constant or stepped with altitude, and (3) part of another fractionation sequence in the “quasi-geostrophic flow region” above ∼5.3 km. The middle region was inferred to be a “mixed layer”, combining moisture from regions (1) and (3). This type of structure is now seen to occur on other high-altitude mountains, including Cerro Aconcagua, Argentina, where observations reach almost 7 km. The new observations confirm the general occurrence of a multi-layered atmosphere during precipitation at high-altitude glacier sites. This structure is linked to synoptic-scale polar cyclones, where the middle layer is identified as being the signature of the warm-front zone. These results have implications for the common practice of using a specific, spatially derived, isotopic thermometer in the time domain for the paleoclimatic interpretation of high-altitude ice-core δ records.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations28
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of GlaciologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207