MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088769802 · doi:10.1139/x05-153

Response of boreal ecosystems to varying modes of permafrost degradation

2005· article· en· W2088769802 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Torre Jorgenson, T. E. Osterkamp

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Arctic SciencesU.S. Department of AgricultureU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsThermokarstPermafrostFrost heavingGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Permafrost degradation associated with a warming climate is second only to wildfires as a major disturbance to boreal forests. Permafrost temperatures have risen to 4 °C since the “Little Ice Age”, resulting in widespread thawing of permafrost. The mode of permafrost degradation is highly variable, and its topographic and ecological consequences depend on the interaction of slope position, soil texture, hydrology, and ice content. We partitioned this variability into 16 primary modes: (1) thermokarst lakes from lateral thermomechanical erosion; (2) thermokarst basins after lake drainage; (3) thaw sinks from subsurface drainage of lakes; (4) glacial thermokarst of ice-cored moraines; (5) linear collapse-scar fens associated with shallow groundwater movement; (6) round isolated collapse-scar bogs from slow lateral degradation; (7) small round isolated thermokarst pits from surface thawing; (8) polygonal thermokarst mounds from advanced ice-wedge degradation; (9) mixed thermokarst pits and polygons from initial ice-wedge degradation; (10) irregular thermokarst mounds from thawing of ice-poor silty soils; (11) sinkholes and pipes resulting from groundwater flow; (12) thermokarst gullies and water tracks from surface-water flow; (13) thaw slumps related to slope failure and thawing; (14) thermo-erosional niches from water undercutting of ice-rich shores; (15) collapsed pingos from thawing of massive ice in pingos; and (16) nonpatterned ground from thawing of ice-poor soils. These modes greatly influence how thermokarst changes or disrupts the ground surface, ecosystems, human activities, infrastructure, and the fluxes of energy, moisture, and gases across the land–air interface.

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)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations350
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207