Using the portable luminescence reader to assess the historical lateral mobility of river channels: preliminary promising results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Timothée Jautzy1,2, Dominik Brill3, Laurent Schmitt1, Gilles Rixhon4 Obtaining robust chronological data on landforms and their related deposits together with constraining rates of earth surface processes have constantly represented a major challenge in Quaternary science. In the fluvial context, Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) is particularly well-established but still faces several limitations. It notably requires expensive and time-consuming sample processing and measurement, frequently resulting in a poor spatial and stratigraphical distribution of sampling which may negatively impact the chronological information. To overcome this main limitation, a Portable OSL reader (POSL) has been recently developed (Sanderson & Murphy, 2010). It consists in directly capturing a luminescence signal (counts per seconds) on unprepared sediment samples. This technique is quick and affordable but, unlike conventional OSL, is not able to yield numerical age estimates. This contribution explores POSL capacities to provide useful relative age information on alluvial sediments from the last centuries. We study and compare 42 samples collected from three alluvial profiles located in the floodplain of a gravelly-sandy mid-sized river: the Bruche (i.e. a sub-tributary of the Upper Rhine, France). POSL stimulations, including both blue and infra-red signals, are performed in combination with grain size analysis. We observe (i) an overall increase of signal intensity with increasing depth, (ii) a very good match between blue and IR signals and (iii) no systematic correlation between signal intensity and grain size. Whilst this last point must still be confirmed (i.e. signal intensity does not primarily depend on grain size), our preliminary results positively suggest that POSL is a promising tool to provide a relative chronology for very young alluvial sediments. Furthermore, it may also provide information on geomorphic processes. These results will be combined soon to numerical dating (OSL and 14C) and compared to outcomes of a planimetric analysis to thoroughly reconstruct the historical lateral mobility of the Bruche river.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".