YUKON EXPLORATION AND GEOLOGY 2003 177 High-level terraces, Indian River valley, Yukon1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-level terraces in the Indian River valley, between the confluences of Ruby Creek and Dominion Creek with Indian River, are underlain by a sand-dominated fill. The fill formed when meltwater torrents from the margin of a Late Pliocene ice sheet drained into the Indian River valley from the divide with the Stewart River basin. A lake or lakes existed in the Indian River valley at that time. Mechanisms for ponding of the lake(s) include regional glacial damming of the ancestral Yukon drainage (Glacial Lake Yukon), or local damming by alluvial fans or landslides. Sufficient evidence does not exist to effectively eliminate any of these hypotheses. Placer gravel may exist below the sandy fill in a buried segment of the pre-glacial Indian River valley near the confluence of Montana Creek. RÉSUMÉ Les terrasses supérieures de la vallée de la rivière Indian, entre la confluence des ruisseaux Ruby et Dominion, résultent d’un remblaiement principalement sableux. Il a eu lieu lorsque les torrents de fusion en provenance de la marge de la nappe glaciaire du Pliocène tardif se sont jetés dans la vallée de la rivière Indian à partir de la ligne de partage avec le bassin de la rivière Stewart. Il existait à cette époque un ou plusieurs lacs dans la vallée de la rivière Indian. Les mécanismes de formation du ou des lacs incluent un embâcle glaciaire régional des eaux de drainage ancestrales du Yukon (Lac glaciaire Yukon) ou un embâcle local par des cônes alluviaux ou des glissements de terrain. Les indices sont insuffisants pour éliminer l’une ou l’autre de ces hypothèses. Il existe peut-être un gravier placérien sous le remblai de sable dans un segment enfoui de la vallée pré-glaciaire de la rivière Indian près de la confluence du ruisseau Montana.
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 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".