Long‐term field measurements of climate‐induced thaw subsidence above ice wedges on hillslopes, western Arctic Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Near‐surface wedges of massive ice commonly outline polygons in tundra lowlands, but such polygons have been difficult to identify on hillslopes because soil movement flattens the ridges and infills the troughs that form beside and above the ice wedges. Over the past three decades, the active layer has thickened near the western Arctic coast of Canada and consequent thawing of ice wedges has been detected by remote sensing for flat terrain but not, generally, on hillslopes. Annual field surveys (1996–2018) at the Illisarvik field site of thaw depth and ground surface elevation show the mean subsidence rate above hillslope ice wedges has been up to 32 mm a −1 since thaw depth reached the ice‐wedge tops in 2007. Annual mean ground temperatures at the site are about −3.0°C beneath late‐winter snow depths characteristic of the ice‐wedge troughs but about −5.3°C under conditions of the intervening polygons. The rate of thaw subsidence is high for natural, subaerial disturbances because meltwater from the ice wedges runs off downslope. The rate is constant, because the thickness of seasonally thawed ground above the ice wedges and the ice content of the ground remain the same while the troughs develop. Observations of changes in surface elevation in northern Banks Island between the late 1970s and 2019 show troughs on hillslopes where none was previously visible. Development of these troughs creates regional thermokarst landscapes, distinct from the widely recognized results of thawing relict glacier ice, that are now widespread over Canada's western Arctic coastlands. Recognition of ice‐wedge occurrence and accelerated thaw subsidence on hillslopes is important in the design of infrastructure proposed for construction in rolling permafrost 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".