MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4224316390 · doi:10.5194/hgss-2021-22-rc2

Comment on hgss-2021-22

2022· peer-review· en· W4224316390 on OpenAlexaff
David J. Lowe, Peter M Abbott, Takehiko Suzuki, Britta J.L. Jensen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsTephraTephrochronologyArchaeologyCommissionVolcanologyHistoryVolcanoGeologyGeographyPhysical geographyPaleontologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tephrochronology is a correlational and age-equivalent dating method whereby practitioners characterize, map, and date tephra (or volcanic ash) layers and use them stratigraphically as connecting and dating tools in the geosciences (including volcanology) and in studies of past environments and archaeology. Modern tephra studies per se began around 100 years ago (in the 1920s), but the first collective of tephrochronologists with a common purpose and nascent global outlook was not formed until 7 September 1961 in Warsaw, Poland. On that date, the inaugural “Commission on Tephrochronology” (COT) was ratified under the aegis of the International Union for Quaternary Research (INQUA). The formation of COT is attributable largely to the leadership of Kunio Kobayashi of Japan, the commission's president for its first 12 years. We were motivated to record and evaluate the function and importance of COT because tephrochronology continues to grow globally and its heritage needs to be understood, appreciated, and preserved. In addition, studies on cryptotephras, which are fine-grained glass-shard and/or crystal concentrations preserved in sediments or soils but insufficiently numerous to be visible as a layer to the naked eye, have also expanded dramatically in recent times. Therefore, in this article, we review the role and impacts of COT under the umbrella of INQUA for 53 of the last 60 years or under IAVCEI (International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth's Interior) for 7 of the last 60 years, including since 2019. The commission also functioned under other names (abbreviated as COTS, CEV, ICCT, COTAV, SCOTAV, and INTAV; see Table 2 for definitions). As well as identifying key persons of influence, we describe the development of the commission, its leaders, and its activities, which include organizing nine specialist tephra field meetings in seven different countries. Members of the commission have participated in numerous other conferences (including specialist tephra sessions) or workshops of regional to international scale, and they have played leading roles in international projects such as INTIMATE (INTegrating Ice-core, MArine and TErrestrial records) and SMART (Synchronising Marine And ice-core Records using Tephrochronology). As well as strongly supporting early-career researchers including graduate students, the commission has generated 10 tephra-themed journal volumes and two books. It has published numerous other articles including field guidebooks, reports, and specialist internet documents/sites. Although its fortunes have ebbed as well as flowed, the commission began to prosper after 1987 when key changes in leadership occurred. COT has blossomed further, especially in the past decade or so, as an entire new cohort of specialists, including many engaged in cryptotephra studies, has emerged alongside new geoanalytical and dating techniques or protocols to become a vibrant global group today. We name 29 elected officers who have been involved with COT since 1961 as well as 15 honorary life members. After reviewing the aims of the commission, we conclude by evaluating its legacies and by documenting current and future work.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0370.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1130.117

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→