Paleomagnetic secular field variation and rock magnetism of some early holocene (<9900BP) postglacial lacustrine sediments near Thunder Bay, Northwestern Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Paleosecular magnetic changes through a 1.5m section of post-glacial lacustrine deposits \nare strongly influenced by mineralogy and differential compaction. The sediments chiefly \ncomprise clay and, in the lower one third part of the section, rhythmites which vary from ~2mm \nto ~Scm in thickness. 125 paleomagnetic specimens were collected in total from the 1.5m section. \nAnisotropy of magnetic susceptibility and anisotropy of anhysteretic remanent magnetization \nidentify a magnetic fabric with maximum susceptibility parallel to the bedding plane of the \nsediments and with a preferred northwest-southeast axis, probably indicating paleo-current \nalignment. Minimum susceptibility represents the pole to bedding, due to grain alignment. \nIncremental acquisition and demagnetization of isothermal and anhysteretic \nmagnetizations and the orthogonal three-axis test indicate that the sediments contain two \nmagnetic phases with different coercivities. Magnetic hysteresis measurements (clays n=226; silts \nn=37) show that clay is dominated by single domain magnetite and hematite (means of \nM5=58.47?9.22Am2 \n, Mrs=17.12?27.22Am2 \n, Hc=21.09?7.69mT, Hcr=62.04?4.09mT) whereas silt \nis dominated by pseudo-single domain and single domain magnetite (means of \nM5=681.0?395.9Am2 \n, Mrs=163.2?84.75Am2 \n, Hc=26.07?2.94mT, Hcr=56.08?3.17mT). The silt is \ndominated by magnetite, whereas the clay carries both hematite and magnetite.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".