Holocene Eolian Activity in South-central Saskatchewan and the Southern Canadian Prairies*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chronology and stratigraphy of eolian deposits at two sites in south-central Saskatchewan were studied in order to extend the spatial and temporal record of dune activity on the Canadian prairies. Optical ages document the timing of valley-infilling by sand dunes in the Qu’Appelle River area, and of cliff-top eolian deposition along the South Saskatchewan River. These ages, along with published radiocarbon and optical ages, are used to develop a chronology of eolian activity for south-central Saskatchewan. Optical ages of eolian sands ranging from 5.7 to 0.14 ka (before AD 2000), with intervening paleosols, indicate alternating periods of eolian activity and dune stability during the late Holocene, supported by published radiocarbon ages. Other published radiocarbon ages ranging from 11.3 to 8.4 cal ka BP indicate early Holocene eolian activity. Mid-Holocene ages are predominantly absent from the chronology and this is interpreted as being due to extensive eolian reworking during at least the latter part of the mid-Holocene. The chronology in south-central Saskatchewan is similar to other parts of the southern Canadian prairies. It is likely that preserved mid-Holocene eolian deposits occur within depositional basins in the southern Canadian prairies, and at sites near the southern boreal forest boundary with the prairie ecozone.
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 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".