MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037636001 · doi:10.1029/2012jf002378

Wind‐formed gravel bed forms, Wright Valley, Antarctica

2012· article· en· W2037636001 on OpenAlexaff
John A. Gillies, W. G. Nickling, Michael Tilson, Eden Furtak‐Cole

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrestGeologySinuosityWavelengthGrain sizeFlux (metallurgy)Aeolian processesParticle (ecology)Particle sizeMineralogyGeomorphologyMaterials scienceOpticsPhysicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bed forms composed of gravel size particles (≈50% of particles >4 mm) are observed in the Wright Valley of the McMurdo Dry Valley system in Antarctica. These bed forms are characterized by a very asymmetrical shape with a mean aspect ratio of 0.025 (standard deviation 0.005), mean wavelength of 2.7 m (±0.49 m), and a mean height of 0.06 m (±0.01 m). Particle size analysis of the bed form sediments shows bimodality with a peak near 9 mm and another between 0.5 mm and 0.25 mm. Time‐integrated sediment trap samples of horizontal saltation and creep flux indicate the flux of particles ≥4 mm during the two‐year monitoring period was extremely low. Measurements of the horizontal displacement of tracer particles (14 mm, 12 mm, 10 mm, 8 mm, and 6 mm diameter) placed onto the bed forms corroborate the low particle flux measurements and limited movement of particles. The bed forms share form and grain size characteristics with both ripples and mega‐ripples, showing poor sorting of particles across a single wavelength except for a slight coarsening at the crest similar to ripples, but their sinuosity suggest that transverse instabilities affect their formation similar to mega‐ripples. Based on the data for the prevailing environmental conditions it can be argued that the Wright Valley form is an expression of gravel particles moved solely by highly intermittent creep processes. This also argues for the need for a very long period of time for their evolution, on the order of centuries.

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)0.000
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207