MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082751709 · doi:10.1177/0959683609353433

Expansion of outlet glaciers of the Juneau Icefield in northwest British Columbia during the past two millennia

2010· article· en· W2082751709 on OpenAlexaffabout
John J. Clague, Johannes Koch, Marten Geertsema

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Holocene · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce fieldGlacierGeologyRadiocarbon datingHolocenePhysical geographyLittle ice ageRock glacierClimatologyOceanographyPaleontologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiocarbon and dendrochronological dating of glacially overridden stumps and detrital wood indicates that two outlet glaciers of the Juneau Icefield advanced shortly before the ‘Little Ice Age’. Tulsequah Glacier advanced to within 2.4 km of its all-time Holocene limit between AD 865 and AD 940. Llewellyn Glacier, one of the largest glaciers in British Columbia, advanced sometime between AD 300 and AD 500, and reached to within 400 m of its Holocene limit between AD 1035 and AD 1210, well before the climactic, ‘classical’ ‘Little Ice Age’ advances of the past several centuries. Our data show that some glaciers in western North America were extensive and expanding at times when alpine glaciers have, in the past, been assumed to be restricted. The evidence raises questions about how to define the time of the beginning of the ‘Little Ice Age’ and, perhaps more importantly, about the utility of the term.

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe HoloceneSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207