MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2196019541 · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2015.10.044

The INQUA Dunes Atlas chronologic database

2015· article· en· W2196019541 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Lancaster, S A Wolfe, David S.G. Thomas, Charlie S. Bristow, Olaf Bubenzer, Sallie L. Burrough, G.A.T. Duller, Alan F. Halfen, Paul Hesse, Joel Roskin, A.K. Singhvi, Haim Tsoar, Alfonsina Tripaldi, Xiaoping Yang, Marcelo Zárate

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)DatabaseScope (computer science)Context (archaeology)GeologyCartographyComputer scienceGeographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The INQUA Dunes Atlas project has developed a global digital database of chronological information for periods of inland or continental sand dune accumulation and stabilization. The database comprises information on the site location (including coordinates), dune type, and stratigraphic context, pertinent analytical information (e.g. luminescence procedures), and literature citations to the original data source. This paper discusses the background to the project, the concept and structure of the chronologic database that forms its core, and gives some examples of the scope of the database and ways in which it can contribute to greater understanding of the spatial and temporal variability in dune development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0160.023
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.009

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations116
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary InternationalSame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207