MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rhythmic Till Sedimentation: Evidence for Repeated Hydraulic Lifting of a Stagnant Ice Mass

2000· article· en· W2080026324 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mandy J. Munro‐Stasiuk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sedimentary Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySedimentationRhythmHydrology (agriculture)GeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringMedicineSediment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The youngest sedimentary facies exposed in erosional hummocky terrain in south-central Alberta, Canada, is composed of alternating beds of massive silty clay diamicton, and sorted sand and/or silt. Diamicton beds are similar in thickness (5-20 cm), both laterally and vertically, within the sequence, and sedimentary structures and consistent clast orientations support a subglacial origin for both the diamicton and the sorted sediment. Alternation between diamicton and sorted strata document rhythmic sedimentary sequences: deposition of melt-out till followed by current deposition. Laterally extensive sorted beds indicate that the currents responsible for sand and silt deposition must have flowed as a sheet. This flow was shallow, no more than 20 cm, indicated by scours below boulders that were suspended from the base of glacial ice. Sheet flow requires that the water was stored beneath the ice prior to drainage. Consequently, some of the diamicton may have been deposited by rain-out through the shallow stored water and, hence, each diamicton bed may represent a combination of direct melt-out onto the bed and rain-out through the water column. Inferred cycles of water accumulation and drainage may have been annual.

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)0.001
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 score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations63
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sedimentary ResearchSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207