Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neoproterozoic glacial records have been discovered on 23 palaeocontinents, their rate of discovery changing little since 1871. Yet, half of all the resulting publications appeared since 2000. The history of research before 1998 is described in five stages defined by publication spikes; subsequent work is not covered because historical perspective is lacking. In stage 1 (1871–1907), ‘Cambrian’ (now Neoproterozoic) glaciation was recognized successively in Scotland, Australia, India, Norway, Svalbard and China. Criteria for recognition included faceted and striated pebbles in matrix-supported conglomerates resting on ice-worn bedrock pavements. In stage 2 (1908–1940), Neoproterozoic glaciation was shown to have been widespread in Africa, Asia and the Americas. Major textbooks summarized these findings, but the rejection of continental drift (to account for late Palaeozoic glacial dynamics) put a chill on research. In stage 3 (1942–1964), the occurrence of glacial deposits within carbonate successions, as well as nascent palaeomagnetic observations, suggested that Neoproterozoic glaciers reached sea-level at low palaeolatitudes, but the belated recognition of sediment gravity flowage caused glacial interpretations to be prematurely abandoned in key areas. In stage 4 (1965–1981), the extent of Neoproterozoic glaciation was rethought in light of plate tectonics. Distinctive chemical sediments (iron±manganese formations and cap carbonates) were identified. In basic climate models, modest lowering of solar luminosity resulted in global glaciation due to ice-albedo feedback, and deglaciation due to greenhouse forcing resulted from silicate-weathering feedback in the carbon cycle. Neoproterozoic glacial geologists were blind to these ideas. In stage 5 (1982–1997), reliable palaeomagnetic data combined with glacial marine sedimentation models confirmed that Neoproterozoic ice sheets reached sea level close to the palaeoequator.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.006 |
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".