MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595992771 · doi:10.18172/cig.3232

Deglaciation of the Cordillera of Western Canada at the end of the Pleistocene

2017· article· en· W2595992771 on OpenAlexaffabout
John J. Clague

Bibliographic record

VenueCuadernos de Investigación Geográfica · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeglaciationGeologyYounger DryasIce sheetGlacierPleistoceneGlacial periodPlateau (mathematics)Physical geographyOceanographyGlacier morphologyChronologyPaleontologyIce streamCryosphereSea iceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nearly all of what is now British Columbia and adjacent areas were covered by an ice sheet at the maximum of the Last Glaciation (MIS 2) about 18,000 years ago. By 11,000 years ago, the Cordilleran Ice Sheet had disappeared, a victim of warming climate, eustatic sea-level rise along its western margin, and perhaps a reduction in precipitation. Deglaciation proceeded by frontal retreat at the periphery of the ice sheet and by downwasting, complex frontal retreat, and localized stagnation in its interior areas. The chronology of deglaciation is constrained, albeit with inherent dating errors, by AMS radiocarbon and 10Be surface exposure ages. High-elevation sites at the western margin of the British Columbia Interior Plateau, east of the Coast Mountains, became ice-free between about 15,000 and 12,000 years ago. Ice cover in the southern Coast Mountains was sufficiently extensive during the Younger Dryas Chronozone (12,900-11,700 years ago) that glaciers advanced into low-lying areas north and east of Vancouver. At the same time, however, a labyrinth of dead or dying tongues of glacier ice covered some interior valleys. By 11,000 years ago, ice cover in the Canadian Cordillera was no more extensive than it is today.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCuadernos de Investigación GeográficaSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207