MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998484039 · doi:10.1139/e09-044

Prediction of decadal slope changes in Canada by glacial isostatic adjustment modellingThis article is one of a series of papers published in this Special Issue on the theme <i>GEODESY</i>.

2009· article· en· W1998484039 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Wouter van der Wal, Alexander Braun, Patrick Wu, Michael G. Sideris

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPost-glacial reboundGeologyShoreGeodesyGlacial periodSeries (stratigraphy)Mantle (geology)Physical geographyGeomorphologyGeophysicsOceanographyPaleontologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, glacial isostatic adjustment (GIA) is the dominant process to cause vertical motion of the land surface. A GIA model is presented herein that can be used to predict slope changes at given locations in North America where GIA is the primary cause for vertical motion. Uncertainty in Pleistocene ice cover and viscosity in the Earth’s mantle prevent one from picking a single GIA model from the literature to predict uplift rates in the region. Therefore, in this study, a range of mantle viscosity values as well as two different ice-loading histories are used in a forward model of the GIA process. The combination of viscosities and ice model that gives the best fit to recently available continuous and episodic GPS observations is assumed to provide the best prediction of slope changes in North America. This model can be used to quantify GIA-induced vertical deformation in local geomorphologic studies. We show that the predicted differential uplift rate in the Nelson River with respect to Lake Winnipeg reaches 1 mm/year over a 200 km distance using the model that best fits the GPS data whereas the ICE-5Gv1.2/VM2 model gives a slightly larger value. The difference in uplift rate between the northern and southern shore of Lake Michigan amounts up to 3 mm/year (slightly larger than the ICE-5Gv1.2/VM2 model), which could lead to a change in shorelines of tens of metres horizontally over a period of 100 years.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207