Geomorphic History Determined by a New Glacial History Paradigm and Topographic Map Interpretation, Towanda Creek Drainage Basin, PA (USA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pennsylvania’s Towanda Creek drainage basin geomorphic history is determined by using a recently proposed geology and glacial history paradigm (which predicts massive and prolonged southwest oriented continental ice sheet meltwater floods flowed across Pennsylvania) when interpreting previously unexplained topographic map drainage system and erosional landform evidence. The new paradigm explains most of the region’s erosional landforms including barbed tributaries, drainage divides, through valleys (valleys crossing drainage divides), water and wind gaps, valley orientations, entrenched meanders, through valley and gap floor elevations, regional ridge crest elevations, upland area elevations, and intervening lowland elevations. The new paradigm suggests the present-day northeast-oriented Towanda Creek drainage basin formed as immense and prolonged southwest-oriented floods first lowered a low relief surface (now preserved if preserved at all by the region’s highest elevations) in the area between the present-day northeast-trending Blossburg and Barclay synclinal uplands and also to the south of the Barclay synclinal upland. Those floodwaters after flowing across the present-day northeast-oriented Towanda Creek drainage basin flowed in a southwest direction through the now southwest-oriented Lycoming and Loyalsock Creek drainage basins and then to and along a now northeast oriented West Branch Susquehanna River valley segment before continuing in a southwest direction along what is now the Allegheny Front. Headward erosion of today’s southeast-oriented North Branch Susquehanna River valley segment between Pittston and Athens, Pennsylvania captured and reversed the beheaded southwest-oriented floodwaters to create the northeast-oriented Towanda Creek drainage system seen today.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".