MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3092117071

Seasonal changes in ice sheet motion due to melt water lubrication

2012· article· en· W3092117071 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Hewitt

Bibliographic record

VenueAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyIce sheetDrainageIce streamMechanicsGeomorphologySea iceClimatologyCryosphere
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A numerical model is used to calculate how the motion of an idealized ice-sheet margin is affected by the subglacial drainage of melt water from its surface. The model describes the evolution of the drainage system and its coupling with ice flow through a sliding law that depends on the effective pressure. The results predict ice acceleration during early summer when the inefficient drainage system is temporarily overwhelmed. The growth of a more efficient drainage system leads to a subsequent slowdown of the ice very close to the margin, but high water pressure and ice velocity are maintained through much of the summer further inland. Annual mean ice velocity increases with the total quantity of melt water except close to the margin, where it is almost insensitive to the amount of melting. Short-term variability of melt water input leads to rapid changes in ice velocity that result in a slight increase in the mean velocity relative to a smoother input. Linked-cavity and poroelastic models for the distributed drainage system are compared, and their relative merits discussed. Two different sliding laws are considered, and the need for a holistic description of hydraulically controlled sliding is highlighted.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAGU Fall Meeting Abstracts→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→