MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399536898 · doi:10.14746/logos.2024.30.1.02

The Encke comet impact/airburst and the Younger Dryas Boundary: Testing the impossible hypothesis (YDIH)

2024· article· en· W4399536898 on OpenAlexaff
William C. Mahaney, Peeter Somelar

Bibliographic record

VenueGeologos · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYounger DryasGeologyPleistocenePaleontologyMegafaunaMeltwaterHoloceneGlacial period

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many have tagged the Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis (YDIH), a supposition, lacking convincing evidence in support. The core of criticism lies squarely on uniformitarianism, that is, uniform processes moving uniformly with no room for catastrophic events, specifically cosmic catastrophic forces. Beyond philosophically based aversion to the YDIH, specific criticism comes from megafauna and archaeologic corners, related to the near coeval disappearance of specific Late Pleistocene species on the one hand, and relation to disruption and temporary disappearance of the Clovis people et al. on the other. The Younger Dryas geologic paradigm, originally in place with meltwater release into the Atlantic in tow, attention slowly drifted to explanation of an innocuous looking, thin (~1-3 cm), black sediment bed found in lacustrine and fluvial deposits of the American southwest, and other intercontinental places. Thus, with thin dark beds of Gubbio in mind, the quest to explain black mat (BM) beds took on a cosmic aspect, one with growing, supporting evidence on several continents. The impossible hypothesis, now the probable explanation of the Younger Dryas climatic reversal, is at center stage, set at 12.8 ka, with a burgeoning corpus of evidence its cornerstone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologosSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207