Subglacial deformation and till formation in a stratigraphic complex Late Pleistocene sequence (Einödgraben/Aurach, Kitzbühel Alps, Austria)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge of subglacial conditions is of great relevance in understanding glacier dynamics. A combination of micro- and macrosedimentological analysis of diamictons and deformation structures can form the basis for the reconstruction of past subglacial conditions. We present the results of such a study on subglacial tills, within an Alpine environment, at Einödgraben in the Kitzbühel Alps (Tyrol, Austria). The Late Pleistocene succession there (MIS 5d–MIS 2) shows great diversity in facies from alluvial and glaciolacustrine deposits to subglacial deposits. Two glaciogenic diamictons (tills) within the sequence were analysed at the microscale and are correlated to the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM; Würmian Pleniglacial) and the early Lateglacial phase of ice decay. The first deformation phase of pre-LGM deposits most likely occurred in a subglacial setting close to the advancing glacier margin and resulted in diapir-like glaciotectonic macrostructures, which are unique to an inner-alpine area. Subglacial erosion over these structures occurred, and later pre-LGM-emplaced deposits underwent deformation and partial homogenisation immediately beneath the glacier base, leading to diamictons, indicative of subglacial deformable bed conditions. The tills of the LGM and the Würmian Lateglacial show a range of microfacies and deformation structures that are evidence of close and rapid changes in till rheology and the stress field dynamic in the subglacial environment. Our study demonstrates the need for a reinvestigation of deposits occurring in the proximity of past active ice interfaces. The paleoglaciological evidence assembled from the detailed and spatially close research on the microsedimentology of tills at Einödgraben reflects our increasing comprehension and understanding of till microsedimentology in Alpine environments. An awareness is also shown of the need for much further research on the glacial depositional mechanics in mountainous terrains that are different from those in the immense lowland plains of the extensive paleo-ice sheets of North America and northern Europe.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".