Rock albedo and monitoring of thermal conditions in respect of weathering: some expected and some unexpected results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Broadly speaking, there is, at least within geomorphic circles, a general acceptance that rocks with low albedos will warm both faster and to higher temperatures than rocks with high albedos, reflectivity influencing radiative warming. Upon this foundation are built notions of weathering in respect of the resulting thermal differences, both at the grain scale and at the scale of rock masses. Here, a series of paving bricks painted in 20 per cent reflectivity intervals from black through to white were used to monitor albedo‐influenced temperatures at a site in northern Canada in an attempt to test this premise. Temperatures were collected, for five months, for the rock surface and the base of the rock, the blocks being set within a mass of local sediment. Resulting thermal data did indeed show that the dark bricks were warmer than the white but only when their temperatures were equal to or cooler than the air temperature. As brick temperature exceeded that of the air, so the dark and light bricks moved to parity; indeed, the white bricks frequently became warmer than the dark. It is argued that this ‘negating’ of the albedo influence on heating is a result of the necessity of the bricks, both white and black, to convect heat away to the surrounding cooler air; the darker brick, being hotter, initially convects faster than the white as a product of the temperature difference between the two media. Thus, where the bricks become significantly hotter than the air, they lose energy to that air and so their respective temperatures become closer, the albedo influence being superceded by the requirement to equilibrate with the surrounding air. It is argued that this finding will have importance to our understanding of weathering in general and to our perceptions of weathering differences between different lithologies. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".