The potential of portable luminescence readers in geomorphological investigations: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The development of functional portable optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) readers over the last decade has provided practitioners with the capability to acquire luminescence signals from geological materials relatively rapidly, which allows for expedient preliminary chronostratigraphic insight when working with complex depositional systems of late Quaternary age. Typically, when using the portable OSL reader, infrared (IR) or blue post‐IR OSL signals are acquired from bulk unprocessed materials, in contrast to regular luminescence dating, which is usually based on measurements on pure quartz or feldspar mineral separates, or on select silt‐sized polymineralic portions. To demonstrate the utility of portable OSL measurements, this paper outlines the basic features of portable OSL readers and their constraints. Subsequently, case studies in which the instrument has been used to elucidate cryptostratigraphic variations in sedimentary sequences for geomorphological applications are reviewed. The studies can generally be grouped into three main categories. The first includes studies where the variation of portable OSL reader luminescence signal intensities with depth are plotted to generate profiles that contextualize sediment stratigraphy. In the second group, portable OSL reader luminescence signal intensities are used to interpret sediment processes that shed light on depositional histories. In the last category, luminescence signals from the portable OSL reader are calibrated to approximate numerical burial ages of depositional units. The paper concludes with a discussion of possible future directions. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".