Regional subglacial quarrying and abrasion below hard‐bedded palaeo‐ice streams crossing the Shield–Palaeozoic boundary of central Canada: the importance of substrate control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three‐dimensional surface visualization models derived from high‐resolution LiDAR data provide new information about the type and scale of erosional processes below Late Wisconsin palaeo‐ice streams traversing the boundary between Canadian Shield crystalline rocks with offlapping Palaeozoic limestones in central Ontario. The hard bed is directly analogous to that found below ice streams in East Antarctica and East Greenland and provides insight into the effects of abrupt changes in substrate type on subglacial processes. Erosion of hard crystalline Canadian Shield rock was largely ineffectual consisting of areal abrasion of rounded whalebacks and local lee side plucking. In contrast, fast flow over the strike of gently dipping well‐bedded and jointed Palaeozoic limestones cut large flow‐parallel grooves and ridges akin to mega‐scale glacial lineations reflecting intense abrasion below narrow streams of subglacial debris dominated by hard crystalline Shield clasts (erodents). Regionally extensive plucking of structurally weak, well‐jointed and bedded limestone produced large volumes of rubbly carbonate debris leaving a 25‐km‐wide belt of uncontrolled hummocky rubble terrain (long known as the Dummer Moraine in Southern Ontario) some 350 km long and locally as much as 10 m thick. Subglacial plucking and abrasion under fast flowing ice were highly effective in stripping limestone cover rocks from Precambrian basement, and over many glacial cycles, may have played a role in the location and excavation of numerous large and deep lake basins around the Shield–Palaeozoic boundary zone in North America.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".