MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2910782533 · doi:10.4095/212202

Composition of sediments in Hudson Strait and Ungava Bay

2001· report· en· W2910782533 on OpenAlexaff
I A Hardy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayOceanographyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information regarding the composition of surficial sediments in Hudson Strait and Ungava Bay comes primarily from BenthosTM piston cores, large diameter and AGC Long Coring Facility cores collected at some fifty localities, together with box cores, and IKUTM clam-shell grab samples from various localities. Many of the coring localities were selected to provide maximum information on the glaciomarine sediments and their chronologies with penetration to the underlying ice-contact sediments where feasible. Cores were also recovered from thick postglacial deposits. Matrix-supported diamict sediments encountered at and near the base of two cores in Eastern basin are considered to be from ice-contact deposits. These sediments were barren of macrofauna and microfauna. Glaciomarine sediments consist primarily of laminated clayey and silty sediments with some sandy components, occasional dropstones, and coarser intervals. They commonly comprise distinctive rhythmically bedded muddy and sandy sediments (cyclopsams and/or cyclopels). Postglacial muddy sediments typically are dark grey, extensively bioturbated clays. Variably sandy and gravelly sediments form a thin surface veneer in areas exposed to current winnowing.

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 score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→