Nine decades of glacier change in the Canadian Rocky Mountains.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glaciers adjust their physical properties to changes in climate, but long records of glacier change needed to examine this relation are spatially and temporally limited. I determined changes in glacier area in the central and southern Canadian Rocky Mountains and changes in length, area, elevation, and volume of the Columbia Icefield over the past nine decades. I used Interprovincial Boundary Commission Survey (IBCS) maps of the Alberta-British Columbia (BC) border (1903-1924), aerial photographs (1948-1993), BC Terrain Resource Information Management (TRIM) data (1982-1987), and satellite imagery (1999-2009) in my analysis. From 1919-2006, total glacierized area in the Canadian Rocky Mountains decreased by 590 ± 100 km² (40 ± 7%); glaciers smaller than 1.0 km² experienced the greatest percentage loss. Slope and minimum elevation are negatively correlated with absolute area loss, and mean and median elevations are negatively correlated with relative area loss. From 1919-2009, glaciers of the Columbia Icefield retreated 1149.9 ± 34.1 m, decreased 59.60 ± 1.19 km² (22.5 ± 5.0%), thinned 49.4 ± 25.2 m w.e., and lost 14.30 ± 2.02 km³ w.e. Debris-covered ice thinned 30-60% less than bare ice. Changes in temperature and precipitation explain some of the observed changes. I detected a lag of two to ten years between climate and glacier response.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".