MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168380465 · doi:10.3959/1536-1098-69.2.87

Controlled Breaking of Mummified Wood For Use In Paleoenvironmental Analysis

2013· article· fr· W2168380465 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Benjamin A. Hook, Jochen Halfar, Ze’ev Gedalof, Jörg Bollmann

Bibliographic record

VenueTree-Ring Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsGeologyArchaeologyFossil woodDendrochronologyPaleontologyForestryMineralogyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discovery of exceptionally well-preserved Paleogene wood fossils (ca. 55–53 Ma) within Canadian Arctic diamond-bearing kimberlites prompted a paleoclimatic study of the Paleocene-Eocene Transition. The samples are not petrified, but have been “mummified” by their inclusion in pyroclastic debris and still contain primordial wood material. However, preferential cellulose loss has rendered the wood very fragile, precluding the use of standard dendrochronological methods of surface preparation. Similar to archaeological charcoal, breaking the mummified wood allows superior visualization of tree-ring boundaries and wood anatomy, but often produces irregular surfaces making microscopic examination difficult. Therefore, a simple aluminum clamp was constructed to break radial wood transects in a controlled manner for the purpose of collecting dendrochronological and wood-anatomical data for paleoclimatic reconstructions. Because it does not require the use of chemical treatments or stabilizing resins, the wood remains chemically unaltered, allowing chemical and isotopic analyses to be undertaken. Future studies of fragile woods may benefit from this method of controlled breaking if sanding is ineffective.La découverte de fossiles bois du Paléogène (55–53 Ma), exceptionnellement bien conservés, dans des kimberlites diamantifères dans l'Arctique canadienne a incité à une etude paléoclimatique de la transition Paléocène-Eocène. Les échantillons ne sont pas petrifies. Ils ont été «momifié» de par leur inclusion dans des débris pyroclastiques et contiennent toujours du matériel du bois primordial. Toutefois, la perte de cellulose préférentiel a rendu le bois très fragile, ce qui exclus l'utilisation de méthodes dendrochronologiques usuelles afin de preparer la surface. Comme pour les charbons de bois archéologiques, en brisant le bois momifié, il est possible de visualiser avec acuité les frontières des arbres-anneau et l'anatomie du bois. Cependant, ceci produit souvent des surfaces irrégulières qui rendant l'examen microscopique difficile. Par conséquent, une pince en aluminium simple a été construite afin de briser des transects radiaux de bois de manière contrôlée, dans le but de recueillir des données dendrochronologiques et des données de l'aspect anatomique du bois, afin d'établir des reconstructions paléoclimatiques. Parce que l'utilisation de traitements chimiques ou de résines de stabilisation n'est pas néccessaire, le fossile de bois reste chimiquement inchangé, ce qui permet des analyses chimiques et isotopiques. Les études futures de bois fragiles peuvent bénéficier de notre méthode de rupture contrôlée si le ponçage est inefficace.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTree-Ring ResearchSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207