The effects of increased ground moisture on permafrost sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kerr, M., Roy-Leveillee, P. 2018. The effects of increased ground moisture on permafrost sustainability. 2018 Biology Graduate Seminar at Laurentian University, April 2018, Sudbury, ON. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.6167927 Early stages of permafrost degradation and thermokarst development in Arctic and subarctic lowlands are often characterized by increased soil moisture due to thawing ground ice. In the field, increased soil moisture has been linked to two contradictory effects on ground temperatures: a cooling effect due to the high thermal conductivity of ice compared to water, and a warming effect due to the latent heat of ground moisture slowing ground-frost penetration in early winter. However, the factors controlling which effect will dominate at a given site, and whether increased soil moisture will facilitate or inhibit further permafrost degradation remain unclear. This research investigates the response of increased soil moisture on permafrost temperatures under different climatic conditions using numerical modelling and field data. It aims to identify the conditions under which increasing soil moisture transitions from having a ground cooling effect to having a warming effect that may facilitate continuous thermokarst development. A one-dimensional, heat conduction numerical model will be used to predict active layer depth and mean annual temperature at the top of permafrost based on air temperature, snow pack development, and ground thermal properties. The model will be calibrated with field data from monitoring stations located in peatlands of the discontinuous and continuous permafrost zones in three latitudinal gradients of Northern Canada. This will allow us to examine the effects of current increasing ground moisture, snow cover and air temperature. This research aims to improve the understanding of positive and negative feedback cycles that contribute to permafrost degradation during the early stages of thermokarst development and provide new insights into the timeline of these events. Knowledge of thermokarst development will better inform future restoration and adaptive management practices in response to climate change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".