Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past few seasons, the Propagation Saw Test (PST) has gained increasing acceptance in some guiding and highway operations in western North America. University of Calgary researchers continued to perform the PST throughout the 2009 winter season in order to further validate the test by building on a previous study. In addition, researchers experimented with column scaling in an attempt to reduce falsestable predictions previously reported for shallow soft slabs. In 2009, more than 600 PSTs were performed in close to 100 snow pits in the Columbia Mountains of British Columbia, Canada to supplement existing data from the previous two winter seasons. At 28 sites in 2009, more than 70 PSTs were performed on 34 layers where fracture propagation was observed (e.g. avalanches or whumpfs) or where fracture initiation was confirmed without propagation. This supplements the 47 sites and 95 tests available to previously validate the PST on the slope scale. An attempt to reduce falsestable predictions of the PST by scaling column length with layer depth below a meter is briefly discussed, supporting the standard test method. A recording standard for the PST is also presented.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".