MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improved isolation of archeomagnetic signals by combined low temperature and alternating field demagnetization

2001· article· en· W2144978862 on OpenAlexaff
Graham J. Borradaile, France Lagroix, Dale Trimble

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Journal International · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemagnetizing fieldRemanenceGeologyMagnetiteEarth's magnetic fieldAnisotropyRock magnetismMagnetic anisotropyGeophysicsMineralogyMagnetic fieldMagnetizationPaleontologyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional alternating field (AF) demagnetization of the magnetite-bearing claystone foundations of a Saxon or late medieval lime kiln in Lincolnshire, England fail to isolate stable characteristic remanences, or remanences compatible with possible contemporary geomagnetic field orientations. Consolidation of the material prevented thermal demagnetization. When low temperature demagnetization (LTD) precedes AF demagnetization, however, the vector plots show a stable characteristic (primary) component. Magnetic anisotropy measurements show that the LTD did not significantly disturb the mineral fabric of the claystone, that the mineral fabric did not deflect the palaeofield, and that AF demagnetization did not induce a field-impressed anisotropy during the experiments. Anisotropy of low-field magnetic susceptibility (AMS) is affected by all minerals, and therefore the anisotropy of the magnetite was isolated by measuring anisotropy of anhysteretic remanence (AARM); this is of more relevance in evaluating the potential for palaeofield deflection. Thus, we conclude that LTD preceding AF demagnetization is responsible for improving the isolation of a characteristic remanence, which then favours a late medieval age for the kiln foundation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.227
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Journal InternationalSame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207