Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent history of mapping permafrost distribution in Labrador-Ungava is reviewed and an attempt is made to assess the accuracy of the most recent maps. Relationships between ground temperature and other environmental conditions are then discussed. These two introductory sections provide the basis for the main objective of the paper. A hypothesis of permafrost development is elaborated and rests upon two considerations: (1) that much of Labrador-Ungava is underlain by permafrost which is in approximate equilibrium with present-day conditions and that its distribution is largely controlled by vegetation cover rather than regional variations in climate, and (2) that patches of relic permafrost have been found widely throughout the southern section of the peninsula. It is proposed that, following disintegration and melt of the last ice sheet, permafrost developed over wide areas before tree species were able to migrate northwards. As the forest cover-types began to occupy areas comparable to those so occupied today ground thermal characteristics changed. This was caused not only by the direct effects of forest invasion but by the impact of the forest on the winter snow cover. As conditions more nearly approached those prevailing today, degradation of permafrost set in and the present relic patches are air that remains of this process. The hypothesis is supported by recent progress in palynological and vegetational history studies. These demonstrate that a tundra phase existed for 1000 to 2000 or more years between the time of ice sheet disappearance and establishment of the forest cover.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".