MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981875306 · doi:10.4095/289917

Coastlines of the Findlay Island Group, Nunavut, and Mackenzie King Island, Northwest Territories: aerial video surveys and ground observations

2012· report· en· W2981875306 on OpenAlexaffabout
R B Taylor, D Frobel, Donald L. Forbes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShoreGeologyBedrockOceanographySeabed gouging by iceArchipelagoSea iceGeomorphologyPhysical geographyArctic ice packAntarctic sea iceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-altitude aerial oblique video imagery acquired in 1986 provided the first continuous shore-zone coverage of the Findlay Island Group and the east and north coasts of Mackenzie King Island since vertical air photography in 1959-1960. The video was used to map physical shoreline characteristics and their changes since the earlier photography. Physical shore-zone characteristics and inshore sea-ice conditions were not significantly different in 1959 and 1986. Specific sites of sea-ice thrusting onshore had changed, but the landward extent of ice thrusting in 1986 did not exceed an older distinctive band of irregular, ice-pushed morphology. Along the shores investigated, the landward extent of ice-thrusting pre-dated 1959 and may be much older, marking the emerged, maximum postglacial landward extent of sea- ice impact. Eight primary shore types were identified based upon coastal processes, sediment texture and shore morphology. Two sea ice-dominated shore types - the scarred and shore ridge are unique to the northwestern Canadian Arctic Archipelago. All shores were low and consisted mainly of sand, mud, or a combination of the two. Gravel and bedrock fragments were present along some shores but did not dominate shore morphology. The distribution of shore types was closely associated with specific bedrock substrates. The present shore and adjacent backshore were dominated by sea ice and fluvial processes. Aeolian processes were locally important along some sand shores. Potential seasonal wave generation was greater along the Findlay Island Group than Mackenzie King Island. Wave generation along most shores was restricted by grounded multi-year ice or pressure ice ridges. Nevertheless, micro-tidal conditions concentrate the energy of very small waves across a narrow beach zone, enabling them to rework or cut these fine-grained shores. Wave-cut banks and minor wave-built features were developed best in small embayments and some inter-island channels where annual open water conditions were more common. Submerged river mouths and low-lying shores, some landward migrating beaches and an abundance of truncated ice-built features provide evidence for coastal submergence and marine transgression. Brief field investigations on Lougheed Island provided critical information on the development of three primary shore types during a time of substantive sea-ice cover. Issues related to shore clean-up of a potential marine oil spill are provided based on present physical attributes of each shore type. Given the low relief and backshore gradient, abundance of fine sediment, a rising relative sea level and increasing open water, dramatic changes in shore morphology and stability are anticipated in the northwest CAA in the next century. Markers were established at five sites to facilitate the measurement of future shoreline changes as environmental conditions change. Subsequent measurements of physical changes since 1986 have not been completed and are long overdue. Shoreline mapping from aerial video surveys along the shores of Mackenzie King Island would also benefit from additional ground investigations.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena→French-language works237,207→