MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Ice-wedge polygons distribution, morphometry and state in the Tombstone Territorial Park, Central Yukon, Canada

2020· article· en· W3097557351 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roxanne Frappier, Denis Lacelle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce wedgeGeologyThermokarstPermafrostSnowPhysical geographyMeltwaterIce formationGeomorphologyClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ice wedge (IW) polygons form through thermal contraction induced by winter cooling of ice-rich permafrost which results in the formation of cracks. Hoar frost develops in the cracks in winter and meltwater infills the cracks during spring and freezes. As the cracking and infilling occurs repeatedly, IWs grow, leading to characteristic surface morphology with depressions or troughs aligned on the axis of the IW and raised rims or ridges on either side. Surface expression of IW is either characterized as low-centered polygons or high-centered polygons, the former being associated with the first stages of IW development, and the latter with IW degradation. Because IWs represent important excess ice close to the surface, considerable local subsidence and related effects on landscape parameters, such as vegetation and moisture, are likely to occur upon degradation. IW polygons distribution, morphometry and state were characterized in the Tombstone Territorial Park (Central Yukon, Canada) using semi-automated remote sensing techniques, field observations and laboratory analyses. The data is used to define determining landscape factors for IW polygons occurrence, to characterise the stages of the IWs development and/or degradation and to estimate the volume of buried ice in the region. Results show that elevation, slope and material are important elements defining IW polygons distribution. The relationship between landscape factors and stages of development is not as clear, and, despite climate changes being homogenous in the area, IW development and degradation is very heterogenous, as shown by the differing moisture, greenness and brightness signals across the polygonal terrain.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→