MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412092996 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-2707

Active subglacial lakes in the Canadian Arctic identified by multi-annual ice elevation changes

2025· preprint· en· W4412092996 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Whyjay Zheng, Wesley Van Wychen, Tian Li, Tsutomu Yamanokuchi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHorizon 2020Leverhulme TrustNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science and Technology Council
KeywordsElevation (ballistics)ArcticThe arcticPhysical geographyGeologyOceanographyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Subglacial lakes influence glacier hydrology, dynamics, and mass balance; however, they are poorly documented outside the polar ice sheets. Here we use high-resolution digital elevation models from 2011 to 2021 and perform regression analysis to characterize 37 subglacial lakes (35 of which are newly identified) across the Canadian Arctic, a region that loses more than 50 gigatonnes of glacier ice yearly. These lakes have an area of 0.3–48.5 km2 and influence surface elevation by 10–150 m, corresponding to a water volume of 0.003–4.5 km3. We classify them into (1) classic subglacial lakes, (2) terminal subglacial lakes at places where two glacier termini converge and coalesce, and (3) partial subglacial lakes with an area of open water at the ice margin. Types 2 and 3 are new and are nearly exclusive in the Canadian Arctic. Lake activities negatively correlate with regional mass balance, implying a need for fine-scale monitoring in the era of accelerated glacier loss.

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)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.275
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; 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→