MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2315786691 · doi:10.1139/e2012-010

Tree macrofossils of Younger Dryas age from Cohoes, New York State, USA

2012· article· en· W2315786691 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norton G. Miller, Carol B. Griggs

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYounger DryasMacrofossilAbies balsameaBlack spruceAllerød oscillationGeologyRadiocarbon datingPicea engelmanniiFossil woodJuniperDendroclimatologyDendrochronologyTaigaBalsamPaleontologyPhysical geographyForestryGeographyGlacial periodBotanyHolocenePinus contortaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tree macrofossils dating from the middle to end (about 1000 years, ca. 12 600–11 600 cal years BP) of the Younger Dryas chronozone were found in an organic deposit on the southwest side of the Mohawk River, near its junction with the Hudson River in Cohoes, New York, USA. The fossils included substantial wood fragments, associated plant remains, and pollen, which indicate a forest of white spruce ( Picea glauca ), balsam fir ( Abies balsamea ), and tamarack ( Larix laricina ). The presence of white, rather than black ( P. mariana ) or red ( P. rubens ) spruce in the Younger Dryas was probably due to a riparian-type environment, confirmed by its location and American beaver tooth marks on some of the wood fragments. The clusters of wood radiocarbon dates indicate periodic changes in erosion and deposition at the site. One possible but very short decline (temperature reversal?) may be indicated by tree-ring growth, but in general, the ring widths of the trees and their growth responses suggest variable but slowly improving conditions over time, possibly from warming temperatures, before the end of the Younger Dryas.

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 score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicTree-ring climate responses→French-language works237,207→