MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058640891 · doi:10.3189/172756403781816220

Surge potential and drainage-basin characteristics in East Greenland

2003· article· en· W2058640891 on OpenAlexaff
Hester Jiskoot, Tavi Murray, Adrian Luckman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Glaciology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilNationale Geologiske Undersøgelser for Danmark og GrønlandEuropean Space AgencyUniversity College LondonEuropean CommissionUniversity of LeedsRoyal Society
KeywordsSurgeGlacierGeologyGlacial periodStructural basinPhysical geographyDrainage basinClimatologyOceanographyGeomorphologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We introduce a new glacier inventory of central East Greenland and use the collected data to test proposed theories on surging. The glacier inventory contains 259 glaciers, of which 10 have observed surges and a further 61 are inferred surge-type. The total glaciated area is 5.5×103km2. The inventory was created from a combination of remote-sensing data and maps, and some 24 glacial and geological inventory parameters were collected for each glacier. A multivariate logistic analysis is used to test which combination of glacial and environmental data is conducive to surging behaviour in East Greenland. Three different models suggest that glaciers with a large complexity, low slope and oriented in a broad arc from northeast to south are most likely to be of surge type. Geological conditions, and hence substrate character, appeared not to be related to surge potential. On the basis of these results and the surge dynamics in this region, we suggest a hydrologically controlled surge mechanism operates in central East Greenland.

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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations81
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of GlaciologySame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207