MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414557025 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-2025-3647

Microstructure and ice dynamics – Integrating Grain Properties, Fabric, and Borehole Data in the NEEM Ice Core

2025· article· en· W4414557025 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Sanchez Moreno, André Lamott, Sepp Kipfstuhl, Ilka Weikusat, María-Gema Llorens, Yannick Heiser, Dorthe Dahl‐Jensen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersHorizon 2020
KeywordsMicrostructureIce coreGrain sizeShear (geology)Deformation (meteorology)BoreholeShear zoneFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The physical properties of ice grains, including grain size and orientation, are fundamental to understanding ice flow and deformation processes in polar ice sheets. This study leverages a newly developed large-area scanning microscope (xLASM) and an automated microtome to non-destructively analyze the NEEM ice core's microstructure across 55 cm segments. The resulting microstructural data are compared with continuous flow analysis (CFA) measurements of impurity concentrations, fabric orientation, and shear strain rates over a 16-meter section (2004–2020 m depth) that spans the Last Glacial Maximum and abrupt climatic transitions during Dansgaard-Oeschger event GS-20. Our results reveal strong associations between grain size, impurity concentrations, and shear deformation rates, with impurity-rich, fine-grained stadial ice exhibiting higher shear strain rates. The ice fabric remains stable despite the changes in shear deformation, indicating that, in this case, the fabric is not the cause of the changing deformation.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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