MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900856175 · doi:10.4095/308479

Reconnaissance surficial geology, Rivière Grandin, Northwest Territories, NTS 86-D

2018· report· fr· W2900856175 on OpenAlexaffabout
D E Kerr, H B O'Neill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyArchaeologyStructural geologyGeomorphologyPhysical geographyGeochemistryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Rivière Grandin map area is characterized by three glacial terrains with different surficial sediments. Inland from the shores of Hottah Lake in the northeast, glacial Lake McConnell deltas, beaches, and offshore sediments occur between 180 and 350 m elevation. Further west, terrain near or above 500 to 600 m elevation includes hummocky glaciofluvial sediments, a few moraine ridges, abundant radial meltwater channels, and an absence of ice-flow indicators, which may indicate local cold-based ice conditions. On the eastern edge of the Ortona Lake highlands, rare drumlins trend northwestward, perpendicular to the flutings at lower elevations to the north and south. The remaining and most extensive map areas are generally covered by streamlined till with interspersed ridged till (minor moraines). Drumlins, crag-and-tails, and drumlinoids record northwestward and southwestward divergent and convergent paleo-ice flows. The areas north, west, and east of Rome Lake have a greater concentration of ridged till. Late during deglaciation, a minor ice-flow shift occurred in the southwest map area, indicated by small, superimposed streamlined landforms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.004

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.186 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207