Commentary on “Past variation in Lower Peace River ice-jam flood frequency” by Wolfe et al. (2020)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contrast to a large body of scientific literature that is based on empirical data and physically based and mathematical analyses, Wolfe et al. (2020) cited proxy-based paleolimnological evidence and argued that the regulation of Peace River has not played a role in the reduced incidence of large ice-jam floods. Such events are essential to the sustenance of perched basins located in the Peace Sector of the Peace–Athabasca Delta. Herein, the arguments advanced by Wolfe et al. (2020) are critically examined and shown to be unconvincing. Relevant literature indicates that a drying trend was first noticed after construction of the Bennett Dam. It is shown, moreover, that the belatedly questioned Traditional Knowledge and Historical ice-jam flood record is a reliable source of information, at least with respect to large floods, which are crucial to perched-basin replenishment. Detailed examination of the Wolfe et al. (2020) magnetic susceptibility (MS) profiles and their interpretation points to serious inconsistencies and leads to a renewed recommendation for coring perched, rather than readily flooded, basins in the future. It is also recommended that the oxbow lakes cored nearly two decades ago be revisited to obtain updated MS profiles. Deficiencies in the interpretation of inferred isotopic-composition time series of three perched basins suggest that all factors influencing such environmental variables be considered before drawing conclusions regarding the frequency of past floods.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".