MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2306905182 · doi:10.5194/cp-12-1519-2016

The PRISM4 (mid-Piacenzian) paleoenvironmental reconstruction

2016· article· en· W2306905182 on OpenAlexaff
Harry J. Dowsett, Aisling M. Dolan, David B. Rowley, R. Moucha, A. M. Forte, J. X. Mitrovica, Matthew J. Pound, Ulrich Salzmann, Marci M. Robinson, Mark A. Chandler, Kevin M. Foley, Alan M. Haywood

Bibliographic record

VenueClimate of the past · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilU.S. Geological SurveyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsGeologyGlacial periodPalaeogeographyClimatologyPhysical geographyPaleontologyGeographyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The mid-Piacenzian is known as a period of relative warmth when compared to the present day. A comprehensive understanding of conditions during the Piacenzian serves as both a conceptual model and a source for boundary conditions as well as means of verification of global climate model experiments. In this paper we present the PRISM4 reconstruction, a paleoenvironmental reconstruction of the mid-Piacenzian ( ∼ 3 Ma) containing data for paleogeography, land and sea ice, sea-surface temperature, vegetation, soils, and lakes. Our retrodicted paleogeography takes into account glacial isostatic adjustments and changes in dynamic topography. Soils and lakes, both significant as land surface features, are introduced to the PRISM reconstruction for the first time. Sea-surface temperature and vegetation reconstructions are unchanged but now have confidence assessments. The PRISM4 reconstruction is being used as boundary condition data for the Pliocene Model Intercomparison Project Phase 2 (PlioMIP2) experiments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations305
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimate of the pastSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207