Influence of Seasonal Post‐Depositional Processes on the Remanent Magnetization in Varved Sediments From Glacial Lake Ojibway (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The natural remanent magnetization (NRM) of high sedimentation rate sediments provides significant information about paleomagnetic secular variation of the Earth's magnetic field and can also potentially be used for stratigraphy. However, NRM acquisition depends on conditions inherent to the depositional environment. In addition to recording a precise annual chronology, varved sediments reflect marked annual sedimentary changes. The Earth's magnetic field does not vary significantly over such a short period, so magnetic changes recorded by varves are expected to reflect the influence of depositional parameters on the recording process. We focus here on a sequence of 27 ± 1 varves from the former proglacial Lake Ojibway (∼8.5 ka cal BP) from which individual cm‐thick summer and winter beds were sampled. Paleomagnetic, granulometric and geochemical analyses were conducted on each bed. A mean inclination shallowing of 24.3° is observed in winter beds, along with an 11.3° shallowing in summer beds. Magnetic declinations follow, on average, the expected field direction, but differences of up to 20° occur between successive beds. Summer beds are thicker than winter beds and have stronger magnetic susceptibility, higher Ca/Fe ratios and coarser sedimentary and magnetic grains. This grain size pattern reflects the input of coarser detrital particles during summer, while the finer fraction remained in suspension until it was deposited in winter. A combination of differential compaction between the winter and summer beds, seasonally varying physical and magnetic properties of sediments, and delayed NRM acquisition explains the variable and coercivity‐dependent inclination shallowing.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".