Annual Layers Revealed by GPR in the Subsurface of a Prograding Coastal Barrier, Southwest Washington, U.S.A.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The southwest Washington coastline has experienced extremely high rates of progradation during the late Holocene. Subsurface stratigraphy, preserved because of progradation and interpreted using ground-penetrating radar (GPR), has previously been used successfully to document coastal response to prehistoric storm and earthquake events. New GPR data collected at Ocean Shores, Washington, suggest that the historic stratigraphy of the coastal barrier in this area represents a higher resolution record of coastal behavior than previously thought. GPR records for this location at 200 MHz reveal a series of gently sloping, seaward-dipping reflections with slopes similar to the modern beach and spacings on the order of 20-45 cm. Field evidence and model results suggest that thin (1-10 cm), possibly magnetite-rich, heavy-mineral lags or low-porosity layers left by winter storms and separated by thick (20-40 cm) summer progradational sequences are responsible for generating the GPR reflections. These results indicate that a record of annual progradation is preserved in the subsurface of the prograding barrier and can be quantified using GPR. Such records of annual coastal behavior, where available, will be invaluable in understanding past coastal response to climatic and tectonic forcing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".