MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3175453451 · doi:10.4095/328091

Longues séries dendrochronologiques établies à partir de troncs subfossiles

2021· report· en· W3175453451 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
F Gennaretti, J Autin, Y Bouthillier, D Arseneault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long tree-ring chronologies are often used in paleoecological and paleoclimatic reconstructions. However, in some regions of the World, such as Eastern North America, these chronologies are scarce. One objective of the ARCHIVES project was to develop a network of long tree-ring chronologies using black spruce subfossil logs collected in six lakes of the Quebec boreal forest. A large number of the sampled logs (1832 specimens) were successfully crossdated, which allowed the development of six long tree-ring chronologies spanning at least 1238 years. At the local scale, these chronologies show the influence of past wildfires on subfossil log recruitment in the lakes and on riparian forest growth. Furthermore, these chronologies are strongly correlated with observed July-August mean temperatures during the last century. These local chronologies were thus used to reconstruct past summer temperatures in the region. A well-expressed Medieval Warm Period (around AD 910-1250), which was warmer than recent conditions, was followed by the Little Ice Age (around AD 1300-1900) and by recent warming. The coldest decades of the last millennium, corresponding to the lowest riparian forest growth, were observed after the strong Kuwae and Tambora volcanic eruptions in AD 1452 and 1815, respectively.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0110.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTree-ring climate responses→French-language works237,207→