MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W8868518 · doi:10.7202/032880ar

The Last Cordilleran Ice Sheet in Southern Yukon Territory

2007· article· en· W8868518 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
L E Jackson, Brent Ward, A Duk-Rodkin, O L Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueGéographie physique et Quaternaire · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyIce sheetIce streamMoraineGlacier morphologyWisconsin glaciationGlacierGlacial periodAntarctic sea iceGeomorphologyPhysical geographyAntarctic ice sheetCryosphereOceanographySea iceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cordilleran Ice Sheet in Yukon radiated from ice-divides in the Selwyn, PeIIy1 Cassiar, and eastern Coast Mountains and was contiguous with a piedmond glacier complex from the St. Elias Mountains. Expansion of glaciers in divide areas could have been underway by 29 ka BP but these did not merge to form the ice sheet until after 24 ka BP. The firn line fell to approximately 1500 m at the climax of McConnell Glaciation. Flow within the ice sheet was more analogous to a complex of merged valley glaciers than to that of extant ice sheets: topographic relief was typically equal to or exceeded ice thickness, and strongly influenced ice flow. Surface gradients on the ice sheet were fractions of a degree. Steeper ice-surface gradients occurred locally along the digitate ice margin. Retreat from the terminal moraine was initially gradual as indicated by recessional moraines within a few tens of kilometres of the terminal moraine. Small magnitude readvances occurred locally. The ice sheet eventually disappeared through regional stagnation and downwasting in response to a rise in the firn line to above the surface of the ice sheet. Regional déglaciation was complete prior to approximately 10 ka BP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGéographie physique et QuaternaireSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207