Enigmatic surface rolls of the Ellesmere Ice Shelf
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The once-contiguous Ellesmere Ice Shelf, first reported in writing by European explorers in 1876, and now almost completely disintegrated, has rolling, wave-like surface topography, the origin of which we investigate using a viscous buckling instability analysis. We show that rolls can develop during a winter season (~ 100 d) if sea-ice pressure (depth-integrated horizontal stress applied to the seaward front of the Ellesmere Ice Shelf) is sufficiently large (1 MPa m) and ice thickness sufficiently low (1–10 m). Roll wavelength initially depends only on sea-ice pressure, but evolves over time depending on amplitude growth rate. This implies that a thinner ice shelf, with its faster amplitude growth rate, will have a shorter wavelength compared to a thicker ice shelf when sea-ice pressure is equal. A drawback of the viscous buckling mechanism is that roll amplitude decays once sea-ice pressure is removed. However, non-Newtonian ice rheology, where effective viscosity, and thus roll change rate, depends on total applied stress may constrain roll decay rate to be much slower than growth rate and allow roll persistence from year to year. Whether the viscous-buckling mechanism we explore here ultimately can be confirmed as the origin of the Ellesmere Ice Shelf rolls remains for future research.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".