MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412595673 · doi:10.5194/essd-2025-315

Global mapping of lake-terminating glaciers

2025· preprint· en· W4412595673 on OpenAlexaff
Jakob Steiner, William H. Armstrong, William Kochtitzky, Robert McNabb, Rodrigo Aguayo, Tobias Bolch, Fabien Maussion, Vibhor Agarwal, Iestyn Barr, Nathaniel Baurley, M. Cloutier, Katelyn DeWater, Frank Donachie, Y. Drocourt, Siddhi Garg, Gunjan Joshi, Byron Guzman, Stanislav Kutuzov, Thomas Loriaux, Caleb Mathias, Brian Menounos, Evan Miles, Aleksandra Osika, Adina Racoviteanu, Brianna Rick, Miles Sterner, Guy D. Tallentire, Levan Tielidze, Kunpeng Wu, Whyjay Zheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormalization propertyGlacierHydrology (agriculture)GeologyComputer scienceGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Proglacial lakes at glacier termini have received widespread attention in the literature for their role in accelerating melt, velocity and contributing to cryospheric hazards. Although global and regional inventories for both glaciers and lakes exist, lake-terminating glaciers have not been consistently identified at the global scale. Based on the most recent global glacier inventory (RGI7), which so far only identifies some marine termini but none for lakes, we present a global inventory of lake-terminating glaciers, differentiating between three classes. The dataset corresponds to the year 2000 (± 1.5), matching to the timestamp of RGI7 outlines (2001, ± 6.2). We find that of 274,531 glaciers worldwide, 1.4 % terminate in lakes, varying between 0.5 and 6.7 % across 19 RGI regions. These glaciers account for 11.4 % of the total glacier area (0.2 to 41.8 % across regions). With multiple submitted flags available for 1260 individual glaciers, we find mapping conflicts to be low (6.7 %). The lake termini data set is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15524733 (Steiner et al., 2025) as well as at https://github.com/GLIMS-RGI/lake_terminating. This dataset is integrated into the forthcoming update to the RGI, v7.1.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.252
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→