NOAA/WDS Paleoclimatology - Colenutt - Larch Valley (young trees) - LALY - ITRDB CANA411
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ring-width chronologies have been developed for alpine larch (Larixlyallii Pari.) at six tree-line sites in the Banff-Kananaskis area of the southern Canadian Rockies. Evaluation of all chronologies confirms that alpine larch ring-width series have higher mean sensitivities, lower autocorrelation, and greater common variance than series from other tree species growing at tree line in this area. Missing and very narrow rings created cross-dating difficulties at all sites but were most problematic for the sites along the Continental Divide. Up to 1% of the rings were missing from entire chronologies, but for specific years, up to 77% of the rings were missing at one site. Marker (narrow) rings were present at all sites for the years 1610, 1654, 1715, 1720, 1723, 1752, 1799, 1824, 1842, 1844, 1915, 1925, 1951, and 1971. Tree growth rates were reduced for the periods 1675-1710, 1815-1850, and 1960-1978 whereas increased growth occurred during 1650-1680, 1750-1800, 1850-1900, and 1920-1950. The only factor that could affect all sites over such a broad geographic area is climate. Principal components analysis indicated that the first eigenvector derived from the six chronologies accounted for 70.7% of their common variance and the first three components accounted for 91.6%. The high correlation between the six first principal component and standard chronologies suggested that either method may be used for standardizing tree-ring data from alpine larch.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".