Evidence for freeze–thaw events and their implications for rock weathering in northern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Discussions regarding weathering in cold environments generally centre on mechanical processes and on the freeze–thaw mechanism in particular. Despite the almost ubiquitous assumption of freeze–thaw weathering, unequivocal proof of interstitial rock water actually freezing and thawing is singularly lacking. Equally, many studies have used the crossing of 0 °C, or values close to that, as the basis for determining the number of ‘freeze–thaw events’. In order to assess the weathering regime at a site in northern Canada, temperatures were collected at the surface, 1 cm and 3 cm depth for sets of paving bricks, with exposures both vertical and at 45°, orientated to the four cardinal directions. Temperature data were collected at 1 min intervals for 1 year. These data provide unequivocal proof for the occurrence of the freezing and thawing of water on and within the rock (freeze–thaw events). The freeze event is evidenced by the exotherm associated with the release of latent heat as the water actually freezes. This is thought to be the first record of such events from a field situation. More significantly, it was found that the temperature at which freezing occurred varied significantly through the year and that on occasion the 1 cm depth froze prior to the rock surface. The change in freeze temperature is thought to be due to the chemical weathering of the material (coupled with on‐going salt inputs via the melting of snowfall), which, it is shown, could occur throughout the winter despite air temperatures down to −30 °C. This finding regarding chemical weathering is also considered to be highly significant. A number of thermal stress events were also recorded, suggesting that rock weathering in cold regions is a synergistic combination of various chemical and mechanical weathering mechanisms. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".