The theory of undercurrent from the Austrian alpine geologist Otto Ampferer (1875–1947): first conceptual ideas on the way to plate tectonics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his paper “Über das Bewegungsbild von Faltengebirgen” [On the movement pattern of folded mountains], published in the almanac of the Austrian Geological Survey in Vienna, Otto Ampferer from Innsbruck (Austria) presented a series of geotectonic considerations and interpretations, which today are summarized under the term “theory of undercurrent”. The interpretation of these processes occurring in the deep crust of the Earth and in the upper mantle was mainly kinematic. For a long time, the tectonic passivity of the magma being anorogenic was dogma until Ampferer’s undercurrent theory changed this in 1906, according to which folds and thrusts on the Earth’s surface portray motions of the deeper magmatic substratum. In these undercurrents, Ampferer recognized the crucial forces that lead to the formation of ocean basins and high mountains on the edges of the drifting continents. In his paper on the history of the formation of the Atlantic region, he presented already, in 1941, a process anticipating what is now known as seafloor spreading.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".