MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2255698926

Abstract: Pleistocene landscape evolution of the southern Central Andes quantified with cosmogenic nuclide techniques

2008· article· en· W2255698926 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
José Luis Antinao, John Gosse, Marc Caffee, Robert C. Finkel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenudationCosmogenic nuclideGeologyBedrockLandslideChronologyPhysical geographyErosionPleistoceneSedimentStructural basinHydrology (agriculture)GeomorphologyPaleontologyGeographyTectonics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jose Luis Antinao1, John Gosse1, Marc Caffee2, and Robert Finkel3 1. Department of Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS B3H 4J1 Canada ¶ 2. Physics Department, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47097, USA ¶ 3. Center of Accelerator Mass Spectrometry, Lawrence Livermore National Lab, Lawrence, CA, 94550 USA Landscape evolution studies depend critically on the quantification of long-term denudation rates. These are difficult to obtain in active mountain belts, because sediments are normally rapidly eroded in these environments. Terrestrial in situ cosmogenic nuclides (10Be and 36Cl) have been used in this study in different ways to estimate denudation rates in the southern Central Andes of Chile. An inventory of large bedrock involved landslides, with a chronology supported by 10Be and 36Cl exposure dating provides reconstructed sediment volumes to estimate denudation rates from landslides during the Pleistocene. Simultaneously, 36Cl basin-wide average erosion rates were obtained for small catchments inside the same area. Both long-term (103–106 a) estimates were compared to short-term estimates based on suspended sediment records for the last 30 years. Rates of denudation of ~0.1 mm/a were obtained using the landslide inventory data, similar to the 36Cl basin-wide average erosion rates (0.15–0.23 mm/a). The estimations from suspended sediment records for the last 30 years show variable values, depending on their position along the orogen, between 0.03 to 0.15 mm/a. As accumulation inside the range is minor, there are two possibilities that can explain these observations, setting aside scale differences for the studied areas. Although for one area all estimates are similar within uncertainty, for others present day sediment transport by large rivers is out of equilibrium with long-term transport. The system might be currently transport-limited but during the Pleistocene it must have had periods of increased sediment discharge. A second alternative is that the bedload component of sediment transport needs to be incorporated more precisely into the estimations from suspended sediment records. Application of three bedload transport theoretical formulations to major rivers of the region supports this asseveration, suggesting that in this environment bedload can represent up to 80% of the sediment transport.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→