MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981725687 · doi:10.4095/289555

Deglacial history of the Champlain Sea basin and implications for urbanization

2011· report· en· W2981725687 on OpenAlexaffabout
H A J Russell, G R Brooks, David Cummings

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrbanizationStructural basinGeologyOceanographyGeographyPhysical geographyPaleontologyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Champlain Sea was an inland arm of the Atlantic Ocean that inundated the St. Lawrence Lowland following retreat of the Laurentide Ice Sheet. The fine-grained sediments deposited in this sea have important implications for urbanization (e.g. slope stability, foundation design, seismic hazard assessment) of the National Capital Region. This two-day field trip reviews aspects of the deglacial landforms and deposits of the area, the Champlain Sea deposits, and reviews the societal implications from the perspectives of hydrogeology and natural hazards. On day one, a visit to the Vars-Winchester esker and environs provides the setting for discussing eskers and Champlain Sea deposits and the importance of these features with respect to regional hydrogeological issues. On day two, the focus shifts to natural hazards, with visits to a cluster of earth-flow scars at Breckenridge, Quebec, and an earth flow near Notre-Dame-de-la-Salette, Quebec, that was triggered by an earthquake on June 23, 2010. Discussion will focus on the seismicity of the earthquake and issues of seismic amplification due to variations in local geology.

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 score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→