MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7131915802

Implication of post-glacial warming for Northern Alberta heat flow - correcting for the underestimate of the geothermal potential

2012· article· en· W7131915802 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Majorowicz, W. Gosnold, A. P. Gray, J. (Jan) Šafanda, R. Klenner, M. Unsworth

Bibliographic record

VenueASEP · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeothermal gradientNorthern HemisphereHeat flowSubsidenceStructural basinLead (geology)Forcing (mathematics)Geothermal heating
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several observations lead us to suggest that the geothermal gradient in regions near the Pleistocene ice margin may contain a transient signal that causes significant underestimation of pres - ent day heat flow. Heat flow increases with depth in northern hemisphere periglacial regions in Eurasia and North America. Temperature gradients increase with depth in thick clastic rocks in the Williston Basin where compaction causes an increase in thermal conductivity. Thermally mature oil source rocks occur in the Williston Basin where subsidence history suggests that rocks should be immature unless paleo-heat flow was higher. Pollen analyses in upland lakes in southern Manitoba indicate that MJJA surface temperatures are 13 °C higher than they were 12,500 ka. Conductive heat flow models using the pollen temperature history as a forcing signal for surface temperature produce temperature vs. depth profiles with increasing gradients that are similar to profiles observed in the Williston Basin.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEPSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207