MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089693175 · doi:10.1002/jqs.1529

Permineralization process promotes preservation of Holocene macrofossil charcoal in soils

2011· article· en· W2089693175 on OpenAlex
Guillaume de Lafontaine, Pierre-Luc Couillard, Serge Payette

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Quaternary Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmazonian Archaeology and Ethnohistory
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern StudiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharcoalMacrofossilTaphonomyHoloceneGeologySoil waterFragmentation (computing)Vegetation (pathology)Physical geographyPaleontologyEcologySoil scienceGeographyChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The use of macrofossil soil charcoal as a palaeoecological tool to reconstruct past vegetation, climate or fire history has gained much interest in recent years. Yet little is known about taphonomy of charcoal in soils. Here we assessed the putative loss of palaeoecological information due to charcoal fragmentation after burial. We found no significant loss of charcoal mass with time. Instead, we found a significant positive relationship between the mass of charcoal particles and their age. Permineralization of charcoal particles older than ca. 5200 a explained the increased charcoal mass with time in mineral soils. The permineralization process increased the density of charcoal particles (resulting in a twofold particles mass increase) and thus offers a protection against subsequent degradation. Our results suggest high stability of palaeoecological information from charcoal macrofossils buried in mineral soils at least over the Holocene timescale. Copyright © 2011 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.201 · 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