25 years of movement monitoring on South Peak, Turtle Mountain: understanding the hazard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1981, an Alberta Government project upgraded the monitoring of South Peak, Turtle Mountain, on the south margin of the 1903 Frank Slide. The monitoring program aimed at understanding the rates of deformation over large, deep fractures encompassing South Peak and predicting a second large rock avalanche on the mountain. The monitoring program consisted of a complement of static ground points and remotely monitored targets measured periodically, and climatic, microseismic, and deformation data collected automatically on daily intervals and archived. In the late 1980s, developmental funding for the monitoring program ceased and some of the installations fell into disrepair. Between May 2004 and September 2006, readings from the remaining functional monitoring points were compiled and interpreted. In addition, readings compiled previously were re-interpreted based on a more recent understanding of short-term movement patterns and climatic influences. These observations were compared with recent observations from an airborne light detection and ranging (LiDAR) digital elevation model and field photographs to give more precise estimates of the overall rates, extent, and patterns of motion for the past 25 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".