Assessing the role of differential frost heave in the origin of non-sorted circles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A. L. Washburn famously proposed and reviewed 19 hypotheses for the origin of patterned ground in periglacial environments over 50 years ago (Washburn, 1956). Of these 19 mechanisms, only a few have been analyzed starting from a fundamental description of the physics to assess their potential contribution to the initiation of patterned ground. Here, differential frost heave (DFH) is investigated as the origin of non-sorted circles in periglacial landscapes. Model results indicating that DFH can spontaneously lead to patterned ground are compared to measurements of patterned ground in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. The characteristic size of the predicted emerging pattern depends strongly on the maximum depth of freezing but is only weakly dependent on the soil composition. The predicted emerging patterns may also be dramatically different in size with a small change in active layer when a relatively thin (~ 10 cm) insulating snow covers the ground during freezing. The model predicted trends agree with field observations of pattern size and active layer depth at two distinct sites. Although two data points cannot conclusively indicate a trend, this correlation gives support for the possibility of determining some subsurface properties using remote sensing images of surface patterned ground.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".