Allochthonous sediment in till near a lithological boundary in central Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clast counts, and measurements of carbonate abundance in the sand fraction, show that little of the till covering a portion of central Ontario was carried across the boundary between Precambrian rocks (up-ice) and Palaeozoic limestone (downice). Seven eighths of the pebble fraction is local, from within ~2-5 km of the site of deposition. The distantly-derived component becomes gradually less abundant down-ice from the lithological boundary, with an exponential distance scale of about 30 km. We ascribe this gradual loss to a combination of comminution and depletion by deposition.However it is not possible to map variations in the abundance of erratics; the pattern is spatially homogeneous and random. The same is true of the abundance of insoluble sand which, moreover, is highly variable.The role of transport of allochthonous sand from the Shield cannot be separated from those of comminution, erosion of local bedrock, postglacial alteration and inheritance of pre-glacial material. The till is best understood as an intimate mixture of "frictional gouge", still more or less in situ , and englacially-transported sediment. Thus it is neither lodgement till nor meltout till; it may be a deformation till, but if so the episode of deformation can have lasted only a few hundred years
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".