MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mineral inclusions in the accretion ice above Lake Vostok

2024· article· en· W4405680175 on OpenAlexfundno aff
German Leitchenkov, Н. В. Родионов, А. В. Антонов, V. V. Krupskaya, Lyudmila Yu. Kryuchkova

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic and Antarctic Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSaint Petersburg State UniversityRussian Foundation for Basic ResearchAlberta Agricultural Research Institute
KeywordsGeologyAccretion (finance)MineralEarth scienceAstrobiologyGeochemistryMaterials scienceAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper is based on additional studies of mineral inclusions in the accretion ice sampled by deep drilling at Vostok Station in central Antarctica. The studies include X-ray microtomography of two mineral inclusions with identification of their mineral composition; analysis of clay minerals in the soft aggregate of the largest inclusion; and geochronological study of zircon grains. X-ray microtomography shows intact morphology of the inclusions in the ice core and their internal texture. The soft aggregate of the largest inclusion is characterized by the dominance of illite, intermediate concentrations of chlorite and small amounts of kaolinite. A notable feature is the absence of mixed-layer minerals typical of Antarctic coastal areas. The most valuable information is derived from new geochronological data and their integration with previous dating data. The detrital zircon U-Pb ages show strong probability peaks between 900 and 1100 Ma, while the detrital monazite ages are clustered between 1250 and 1450 Ma. Both of these age intervals correspond to the Rayner Orogeny.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.288 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic and Antarctic ResearchSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207