Discrimination of hot versus cold avalanche deposits: Implications for hazard assessment at Mount Meager, B.C.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The surficial deposits surrounding the Mount Meager volcanic complex include numerous avalanche deposits. These deposits share many attributes: (a) they are nearly monolithologic and comprise mainly intermediate volcanic rock clasts, (b) they lack internal structure, and (c) they are very poorly sorted. Despite these similarities, the avalanche deposits represent two distinct processes. Mass wasting of the Mount Meager volcanic edifice has produced cold rock avalanche deposits, whereas gravitational collapse of active lava domes and flows has produced hot block and ash avalanche deposits. The ability to discriminate between these "hot" and "cold" avalanche deposits is a critical component in the assessment of hazards in volcanic terranes. Hot block and ash avalanche deposits can be distinguished by the presence of radially-oriented joints, breadcrust textures, and incipient welding, which are features indicative of high emplacement temperatures. Conversely, rock avalanche deposits resulting from mass wasting events may be distinguished by the presence of clasts that preserve pre-depositional weathering and jointing surfaces. Volcanic avalanches are mechanically similar to rock avalanches but pose a greater hazard due to high temperatures, increased fluidization from degassing and the potential to decouple highly mobile elutriated ash clouds. The increasing use of hazardous regions such as the Lillooet River valley requires more reliable risk assessment in order to minimize losses from future hazardous events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".