Delineation of Paleowind Direction from Dunes in Simcoe County, Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dune fields that developed along paleolake shorelines in Ontario are a product of paleoenvironmental conditions, which developed as a result of glacially influenced geological processes. In Simcoe County, Ontario, many dune fields were created between 3 and 12 ka, when this area was covered by a series of lakes, bordered by thick sandy beaches. Coastal sediments of the glacial Lake Algonquin and the Nipissing phase of the upper Great Lakes were reworked primarily by paleowind activity and intense periodic storms once lake levels had decreased. This formed dunes, which are now common along the south-eastern coast of Georgian Bay in Simcoe County. Dunes that developed earlier (8–10 ka) have a different average orientation than dunes that developed later (3–5 ka). Various geomorphometric techniques are tested to construct a replicable methodology for determining paleowind direction. Through identification of parabolic dunes, azimuth angles were determined and used to infer the dominant paleowind directions. Dunes on the paleolake Algonquin plain commonly have a north-east to south-west orientation, whereas dunes associated with Nipissing phase shorelines formed via north-westerly winds. These data may suggest changing prevailing winds in the Great Lakes region during deglaciation.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".