About the collapse of a huge ice sheet lake on the Laurentide ice sheet.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A theory postulates that a huge ice lake named “Lake Agassiz” existed near the border between Canada and the United States during the last glacial age. It was thought that this lake collapsed, sometime between 13,000 to 8,200 years ago, causing global environmental changes such as cooling in the Younger Dryas period and the sea level rise. However, the truth about Lake Agassiz and its collapse remained unclear. To verify the actuality of the collapse, a simulation software was created for the geomorphological analysis and water volume calculation. The result of the present analysis indicated that the amount of water in Lake Agassiz was much smaller than presumed in the previous theory. Considering the surrounding topography, we deduced that Lake Agassiz was not the type of lake whose collapse would have caused a large-scale flood. Additionally, from a slope map created for the North American continent, we discovered a topography that appears to be a trace of erosion caused by a large-scale flood near Lake Agassiz. These findings reveal that the flooding of Lake Agassiz was likely caused by the collapse of an even larger ice-sheet lake. This study considers the scale and mechanism of the floods from a giant ice-sheet lake that existed in the Laurentide Ice Sheet.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".