MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2753872299 · doi:10.5194/essd-2017-96

Supraglacial debris cover assessment in the CaucasusMountains, 1986-2000-2014

2017· article· en· W2753872299 on OpenAlexaff
Levan Tielidze, Roger Wheate, Stanislav Kutuzov, Kate Doyle, Ivan Lavrentiev

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlacierDebrisGeologyMoraineGlacier mass balanceDigital elevation modelPhysical geographyMassifAdvanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection RadiometerElevation (ballistics)Glacier morphologyGeomorphologyGeographyRemote sensingClimatologyCryosphereIce stream

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Surpaglacial debris cover plays an increasingly important role impacting on glacier ablation, while there have been limited recent studies for the assessment of debris covered glaciers in the Greater Caucasus mountains. We selected 559 glaciers according to the sections and macroslopes in the Greater Caucasus main watershed range and the Elbrus massif to assess supraglacial debris cover (SDC) for the years 1986, 2000 and 2014. Landsat (Landsat 5 TM, Landsat 7 ETM+, Landsat 8 OLI) and SPOT satellite imagery were analysed to generate glacier outlines using manual and semi-automated methods, along with slope information from a Digital Elevation Model. The study shows there is greater SDC area on the northern than the southern macroslope, and more in the eastern section than the western and central. In 1986-2000-2014, the SDC area increased from 6.4 %-8.2 %-19.4 % on the northern macroslope (apart from the eastern Greater Caucasus section), while on the southern macroslope, SDC increased from 4.0 %-4.9 %-9.2 %. Overall, debris covered glacier numbers increased from 122-143-172 (1986-2000-2014) for 559 selected glaciers. Despite the total glacier area decrease, the SDC glacier area and numbers increased as a function of slope inclination, aspect, glacier morphological type, Little Ice Age (LIA) moraines, rock structure and elevation. The datasets are available for public download at https://doi.pangaea.de/10.1594/PANGAEA.880147.

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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.250

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→