Chemical complexity and source of the White River Ash, Alaska and Yukon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The White River Ash, a prominent stratigraphic marker bed in Alaska (USA) and Yukon (Canada), consists of multiple compositional units belonging to two geochemical groups. The compositional units are characterized using multiple criteria, with combined glass and ilmenite compositions being the best discriminators. Two compositional units compose the northern group (WRA-Na and WRA-Nb), and two units are present in the eastern group (WRA-Ea and the younger, WRA-Eb). In the proximal area, the ca. 1900 yr B.P. (Lerbekmo et al., 1975) WRA-Na displays reverse zoning in the glass phase and systematic changes in ilmenite composition and estimated oxygen fugacity from the base to the top of the unit. The eruption probably tapped different magma batches or bodies within the magma reservoir with limited mixing or mingling between them. The 1147 cal yr B.P. (calibrated years, approximately equivalent to calendric years) (Clague et al., 1995) WRA-Ea eruption is only weakly zoned, but pumices with different glass compositions are present, along with gray and white intermingled glass in individual pumice clasts, indicating the presence of multiple magmatic bodies or layers. All White River Ash products are high-silica adakites and are sourced from the Mount Churchill magmatic system.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".