MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sequence of events from the onset to the demise of the Last Interglacial: Evaluating strengths and limitations of chronologies used in climatic archives

2015· article· en· W2147061362 on OpenAlexaff
Aline Govin, Émilie Capron, Polychronis C. Tzedakis, Sophie Verheyden, Bassam Ghaleb, Claude Hillaire‐Marcel, Guillaume St‐Onge, Joseph S. Stoner, Franck Bassinot, Lucie Bazin, Thomas Blunier, Nathalie Combourieu‐Nebout, Anuar El Ouahabi, Dominique Genty, Rainer Gersonde, Patricia Jiménez‐Amat, Amaëlle Landais, Belén Martrat, Valérie Masson‐Delmotte, Frédéric Parrenin, Marit‐Solveig Seidenkrantz, Daniel Vereş, Claire Waelbroeck, R. Zahn

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Science Reviews · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersBritish Antarctic SurveyNatural Environment Research CouncilDanmarks Frie ForskningsfondBelgian Federal Science Policy OfficeDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean CommissionSight Research UK
KeywordsDemiseInterglacialGeologySequence (biology)ClimatologyPhysical geographyPaleontologyGeographyQuaternary

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Last Interglacial (LIG) represents an invaluable case study to investigate the response of components of the Earth system to global warming. However, the scarcity of absolute age constraints in most archives leads to extensive use of various stratigraphic alignments to different reference chronologies. This feature sets limitations to the accuracy of the stratigraphic assignment of the climatic sequence of events across the globe during the LIG. Here, we review the strengths and limitations of the methods that are commonly used to date or develop chronologies in various climatic archives for the time span (∼140–100 ka) encompassing the penultimate deglaciation, the LIG and the glacial inception. Climatic hypotheses underlying record alignment strategies and the interpretation of tracers are explicitly described. Quantitative estimates of the associated absolute and relative age uncertainties are provided. Recommendations are subsequently formulated on how best to define absolute and relative chronologies. Future climato-stratigraphic alignments should provide (1) a clear statement of climate hypotheses involved, (2) a detailed understanding of environmental parameters controlling selected tracers and (3) a careful evaluation of the synchronicity of aligned paleoclimatic records. We underscore the need to (1) systematically report quantitative estimates of relative and absolute age uncertainties, (2) assess the coherence of chronologies when comparing different records, and (3) integrate these uncertainties in paleoclimatic interpretations and comparisons with climate simulations. Finally, we provide a sequence of major climatic events with associated age uncertainties for the period 140–105 ka, which should serve as a new benchmark to disentangle mechanisms of the Earth system's response to orbital forcing and evaluate transient climate simulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations188
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary Science ReviewsSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207