Periglacial processes and landforms of the Antarctic: a review of recent studies and directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The wide range of periglacial environments of the Antarctic, from the wet, mild oceanic sub-Antarctic through to the cold, dry continent, provides not only an extensive modern laboratory, but also one that offers insights into conditions in the Northern Hemisphere at the height of the last glacial, is an analogue for periglacial conditions on other planets, and can be used for monitoring climatic change. Almost the whole known suite of periglacial landforms is present. Recent research directions show strong linkages between the biotic components and the abiotic responses, offering new insights into periglacial synergies and hence landform development. Other new directions are those of using the Antarctic as an analogue for periglacial conditions on Mars, and multinational undertakings monitoring permafrost and active layer changes. During the past three decades there have been a number of reviews of periglacial landforms and processes for both the area as a whole as well as for specific locations or regions. Here information regarding material post-dating the most recent reviews is provided and an attempt is made to highlight new directions and findings. This broad-based review provides a foundation for more detailed accounts on some of the periglacial attributes provided in other papers within these volumes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".