MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999378240 · doi:10.1017/aog.2019.45

Characterization of glacial silt and clay using automated mineralogy

2019· article· en· W2999378240 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jeff W. Crompton, Gwenn E. Flowers, Brendan Dyck

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Glaciology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityParks CanadaAssociation of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies
KeywordsSiltGeologyGrain sizeSedimentComminutionMineralogyRock fragmentGlacial periodAbrasion (mechanical)Clay mineralsGranulometryWeatheringParticle-size distributionOutcropGeochemistryGeomorphologyQuartzParticle sizePaleontologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Glacial erosion produces vast quantities of fine-grained sediment that has a far-reaching impact on Earth surface processes. To gain a better understanding of the production of glacial silt and clay, we use automated mineralogy to quantify the microstructure and mineralogy of rock and sediment samples from 20 basins in the St. Elias Mountains, Yukon, Canada. Sediments were collected from proglacial streams, while rock samples were collected from ice marginal outcrops and fragmented using electrical pulse disaggregation. For both rock fragments and sediments, we observe a log-normal distribution of grain sizes and a sub-micrometer terminal grain size. We find that the abrasion of silt and clay results in both rounding and the exploitation of through-going fractures. The abundance of inter- versus intragranular fractures depends on mineralogy and size. Unlike the relatively larger grains, where crushing and abrasion are thought to exploit and produce discrete populations of grain sizes, the comminution of fines leads to a grain size, composition and rounding that is continuously distributed across size, and highly dependent on source-rock properties.

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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of GlaciologySame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207