MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011458597 · doi:10.1029/1999wr900271

Five centuries of interannual sediment yield and rainfall‐induced erosion in the Canadian High Arctic recorded in lacustrine varves

2000· article· en· W2011458597 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Scott F. Lamoureux

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVarveSedimentErosionGeologyArcticPhysical geographyHydrology (agriculture)StormEnvironmental scienceFlood mythClimatologyOceanographyGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 487‐year sediment yield record based on the varves from Nicolay Lake, Nunavut, Canada, is used to investigate long‐term yield variability. A general extreme value model, estimated with probability‐weighted moments, was used to identify the magnitude and timing of the low‐probability events. Exceptional sediment yields in 1951 and 1962 coincided with the two largest rainfalls on record. Smaller multiday rainfalls were also recorded in the varves as subannual rhythmites, although rhythmites were not generated by rainfall events that occurred during the nival flood or after prolonged warm weather. By accounting for probable soil moisture conditions and the timing of nival floods compared to major rainfall, rhythmites in all but 3 years of the sediment record can be explained by storms exceeding ∼13 mm total. Generally, more frequent extremes and increased variance in yield occurred during the 17th and 19th centuries, likely due to increased occurrences of cool, wet synoptic types during the coldest periods of the Little Ice Age.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations125
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207