Palaeoflood records for the Red River, Manitoba, Canada, derived from anatomical tree-ring signatures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Palaeoflood records for the Red River in southern Manitoba, Canada, were derived from anatomical tree-ring signatures in Quercus macrocarpa (Michx) collected at 16 living-tree sites, several historical buildings and archaeological sites, and subfossil logs buried in river alluvium. Prolonged inundation of trees during spring and early summer induces the development of anatomical anomalies (flood rings) that provide a proxy record of extreme floods. Flood-signature records for the Lower Red River basin (LRB) extend from ad 1999 to 1648 and suggest that the Red River flood of 1826 was the largest during the last 352 years. The tree-ring record identifies five of the largest seven floods in the LRB during the last 200 years and documents extreme floods in 1747, 1762, 1826, 1852, 1950, 1979 and 1997. The Upper Red River basin tree-ring flood record extends from ad 1997 to 1448 and contains flood rings for 1510, 1538, 1658, 1682, 1726, 1727, 1741, 1747 and 1762. Factors influencing the formation of flood rings, and hence efficacy of flood-ring records, include flood timing, age and availability of trees, and variations in response along the stem. Evidence from the LRB indicates intervals of increased flood frequency during the mid-1700s, the mid-1800s, and the second half of the twentieth century, and intervals without extreme flooding in 1648–1746, 1763–1825 and 1862–1949. The tree-ring evidence supports the premise that high Red River flows are non-stationary and that past climatic and landscape changes may have influenced local flood risks.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it