MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090722826 · doi:10.1191/0959683605hl780rp

‘Little Ice Age’ glacier fluctuations, Gran Campo Nevado, southernmost Chile

2005· article· en· W2090722826 on OpenAlexaff
Johannes Koch, Rolf Kilian

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Holocene · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftDeutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
KeywordsMoraineGlacierGeologyPhysical geographyGlacial periodHoloceneIce fieldIce capsYounger DryasLittle ice ageGeomorphologyPaleontologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moraine systems of Glaciar Lengua (unofficial name) and neighbouring glaciers of Gran Campo Nevado (53°S) in the southernmost Andes were mapped and dated by dendrochronological means. They were formed around AD 1628, 1872/1875, 1886, 1902, 1912 and 1941 with the advance in the 1870s being calendar dated. Recessional moraines within each moraine system correspond to brief standstills or minor readvances. A significantly older moraine could not be directly dated by dendrochronological methods as the forest on it was assumed to be second-generation or older. From soil-formation rates, it is assumed that this moraine was formed at some time between AD 1280 and 1460, a time in which many other glaciers in Patagonia formed moraines. Overall, fluctuations of Glaciar Lengua show a strong synchronicity to other glaciers in the Patagonian Andes between 41°S and 55°S. This study suggests that Glaciar Lengua and possibly all glaciers of Gran Campo Nevado reached their Holocene maximum during the‘Little Ice Age.’

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)0.000
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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations88
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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