Analysis of the Four Brothers Slump, Lake Champlain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-resolution CHIRP (compressed high intensity radar pulse) seismic reflection profiles reveal the presence of a deep-water lacustrine slump located in the Main Lake of Lake Champlain. Named the Four Brothers Slump, this slump is composed of a heavily disturbed sediment body that was transported down slope in a mass-wasting event. The Four Brothers Slump has an aerial distribution of 5.5x105 m2 and the volume of sediment transported is 4.8x106 m3. Further information on the Four Brothers Slump was obtained through the use of side-scan sonar and the analysis of four 7 m sediment cores.\n Side-scan sonar data show the slump initiated on a structural rise to the southeast of the slumped area. Analysis of the seismic profiles and identification of the foraminifer microfossil E. excavatum f. clavata show that the slump failed above marine Champlain Sea sediments in the transition to Lake Champlain sediments. The water-saturated sediments over impenetrable Champlain Sea clays may have led to pore pressure that exceeded the hydrostatic pressure and led to slumping, when triggered. Utilizing 137Cs dating and magnetic anisotropy on one of the sediment cores collected, it is estimated that the slump occurred between 3600 and 3800 yr BP. The Four Brothers Slump may have been triggered by some seismic event in the region not previously documented.\n Recent slumping in Quebec, Canada (which had human fatalities), near Mount Independence, VT, (which had extensive property damage), and recently along the shoreline of Lake Champlain occurred along the Champlain Sea – Lake Champlain sediment interface and was related to high precipitation events. Analyzing the Four Brothers Slump within Lake Champlain will help in the identification of "at risk" locations for slumping in the region and along the lake's shorelines to ultimately mitigate further human and property disasters.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".