MétaCan
Menu
← all works

Mid-Pleistocene revolution and the ‘eccentricity myth’

2005· article· en· 189 citations· W2141882346 on OpenAlex· 10.1144/gsl.sp.2005.247.01.02

Why is this work in the frame?

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

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Full frame distilled prediction

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.

Candidate categories
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
Genre
Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score
0.335
Threshold uncertainty score
0.994
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread
0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Abstract The mid-Pleistocene revolution (MPR) is the term used to describe the transition between 41 ka and 100 ka glacial-interglacial cycles which occurred about one million years ago. Despite eccentricity having by far the weakest influence on insolation received at the Earth’s surface of any of the orbital parameters, it is often assumed to be the primary driver of the post-MPR 100 ka climate cycles. The traditional solution to this is to call for a highly nonlinear response by the global climate system to eccentricity. This ‘eccentricity myth’ is a simplified view of the relationship between global climate and orbital forcing and is in part due to an artefact of spectral analysis. Our aim here is to clarify the often confused role of eccentricity and review current theories of the MPR. We suggest that the post-MPR ‘100 ka’ glacial-interglacial cycles are more closely linked to precession, with the saw-toothed climate cycles being defined by every four or five precessional cycle. Because control over the number of precessional cycles involved is determined by eccentricity, eccentricity at most paces rather than drives the system. If true, then one must also question whether the MPR, itself defined by an abrupt change in spectral characteristics, is not also somewhat misconceived.

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.

The record

Venue
Geological Society London Special Publications
Topic
Geology and Paleoclimatology Research
Field
Earth and Planetary Sciences
Canadian institutions
University of British Columbia
Funders
not available
Keywords
MythologyPleistoceneEccentricity (behavior)HistoryGeologyArchaeologyAncient historyGeographyPolitical scienceClassicsLaw
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes