MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981439329 · doi:10.4095/295540

Icings in the Great Slave region (1985-2014), Northwest Territories, mapped from Landsat Imagery

2014· report· en· W2981439329 on OpenAlexaffabout
Peter Morse, S A Wolfe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingGeographyGeologyCartographyPhysical geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Icings are sheet-like masses of layered ice that form over the winter by freezing of successive flows of water on the ground surface or on top of river or lake ice. Because icings can negatively impact the performance of seasonal and all-season roads, they are a transportation risk in the Arctic. Therefore, maps of their occurrence and reoccurrence provide important geoscience information required for development and transportation infrastructure planning. In this study, threshold values of band ratios were used to derive a set of icing maps from Landsat image time series of images (1985 - 2014), located within the Slave Geological Province (WRS-2 Path 47/Row 16). The icings maps were generated using image data acquired in late-spring when the region is largely snow-free, but ice bodies remain. A water mask created from summer image data was used to differentiate frozen water bodies so any remaining ice was considered to be land-fast, and thus icings formed from winter overland flow of water. Icing occurrence and reoccurrence maps were generated by overlaying the successive icing distribution maps in a Geographic Information System. This Open File contains digital, georeferenced icing data.

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)0.001
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 score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→