Reconstructing ice-margin retreat using delta morphostratigraphy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paleogeographic reconstruction of the successive inland positions of a retreating ice sheet is generally constrained by mapping moraines. However, deltaic complexes constructed by sediment-charged meltwater can also provide a record of the retreating ice-margin positions. Here, we examine a serie of ice-contact, ice-distal glaciofluvial and paraglacial depositional systems that developed along the Québec North Shore (eastern Canada) in the context of falling relative sea level during the northward retreat of the Laurentide Ice Sheet (LIS). Ice-contact depositional systems formed when the LIS was stillstanding along the Québec North Shore. Subsequent inland retreat of the ice margin generated glacial meltwaters feeding sediment to glaciofluvial deltas, leading to their rapid progradation. The retreat of the ice margin from drainage basins was marked by the onset of paraglacial processes such as the shutdown of delta progradation, severe fluvial entrenchment, and deposition of shallow-marine strata. Four end-member scenarios describe the spatial and stratigraphic distribution of these three depositional systems (ice-contact deposits, ice-distal glaciofluvial deltas, and paraglacial suites). They reflect both the inherited drainage basin physiography and the retreat pattern of the ice margin. Applied to twenty deltaic complexes, these end-members allowed us to refine the model of LIS-margin retreat over southeastern Québec.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".