MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027872785 · doi:10.1139/e07-064

AMS-dated late Pleistocene taiga vole (Rodentia: Microtus xanthognathus) from northeast British Columbia, Canada: a cautionary lesson in chronologyThis article is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue on the theme<i>Geology of northeastern British Columbia and northwestern Alberta: diamonds, shallow gas, gravel, and glaciers</i>.

2008· article· en· W2027872785 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Richard J. Hebda, James A. Burns, Marten Geertsema, A. J. T. Jull

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alberta MuseumUniversity of VictoriaPositive Living NorthRoyal British Columbia Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleistoceneGeologyColluviumPaleontologyVoleMicrotusTaigaBorealSedimentary rockSequence (biology)ArchaeologyPhysical geographyGeographyEcologyBiologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dissected colluvial sediments on a Peace River terrace at Bear Flat, northeast British Columbia enclosed a late Pleistocene micromammalian faunule. The fossil remains, including a few loosely articulated skulls and mandibles, were dominated by taiga voles ( Microtus xanthognathus ). The Bear Flat site constitutes the second fossil occurrence in the region of this elusive species, which is unknown in British Columbia in historic times. The late Pleistocene age, determined by accelerator mass spectrometry directly on taiga vole bone collagen, is consistent with the ages of widespread taiga vole records peripheral to the Laurentide ice sheet in western, mid-western, and eastern North America. The presence of allo-chronous remains within a comprehensively dated sedimentary sequence provides a cautionary note about straightforward acceptance of relative stratigraphic dating.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.161 · 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.

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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207