MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617121512 · doi:10.1017/qua.2017.38

Chronology and glass chemistry of tephra and cryptotephra horizons from lake sediments in northern Alaska, USA

2017· article· en· W2617121512 on OpenAlexaff
Alistair Monteath, Maarten van Hardenbroek, Lauren J. Davies, Duane Froese, Peter G. Langdon, Xiaomei Xu, Mary E. Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of OxfordNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKQuaternary Research Association
KeywordsTephraGeologyChronologyRadiocarbon datingHoloceneTephrochronologyVolcanoVolcanic glassPaleontologyRange (aeronautics)ArchaeologyGeochemistryPhysical geographyVolcanic rockGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Holocene tephrostratigraphy in Alaska provides independent chronology and stratigraphic correlation in a region where reworked old (Holocene) organic carbon can significantly distort radiocarbon chronologies. Here, we present new glass chemistry and chronology for Holocene tephras preserved in three Alaskan lakes: one in the eastern interior and two in the southern Brooks Range. Tephra beds in the eastern interior lake-sediment core are correlated with the White River Ash and the Hayes tephra set H (~4200–3700 cal yr BP), and an additional discrete tephra bed is likely from the Aleutian arc/Alaska Peninsula. Cryptotephras (nonvisible tephras) found in the Brooks Range include the informally named “Ruppert tephra” (~2700–2300 cal yr BP) and the Aniakchak caldera-forming event II (CFE II) tephra (~3600 cal yr BP). A third underlying Brooks Range cryptotephra is chemically indistinguishable from the Aniakchak CFE II tephra (4070–3760 cal yr BP) and is likely to be from an earlier eruption of the Aniakchak volcano.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.273 · 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.

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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary ResearchSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207