MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034179055 · doi:10.1142/s2661339520500092

Basic Physics and the Shape of Glaciers

2020· article· en· W3034179055 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Physics Educator · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlacierGeologyGlaciologyRock glacierScalingGlacier ice accumulationGeomorphologyCryosphereClimatologyIce streamGeometryMathematicsSea iceHydrogeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glaciers provide an impressive application of fluid mechanics and materials, and thermal physics. The basic microphysical properties of ice determine the shape of a glacier or ice cap. The order of magnitude of the maximum ice thickness is predicted using Weisskopf’s heuristic argument for the maximum height of a mountain, which involves only the specific latent heat of fusion and the acceleration of gravity. The local thickness of a glacier depends on the assumed ice rheology. The equations describing the steady state longitudinal glacier profile differ greatly for perfectly plastic ice and for ice following Glen’s law. Analytical solutions of these equations are derived: they fit well the data for ice caps but less so for alpine glaciers. Volume-area scaling, a major tool of glaciology, is discussed in relation with glacier profiles.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.185 · 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