Difference between revisions of "Category:Chronologies Working Group"
(→Specific tasks) |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
For each chronology type, we recommend: | For each chronology type, we recommend: | ||
* structuring discussions around what scientific questions one would want to ask of the data | * structuring discussions around what scientific questions one would want to ask of the data | ||
| − | * listing essential, recommended, and optional information | + | * listing essential, recommended, and optional information for: |
| + | - the age models themselves | ||
| + | - the chronological measurements (data table) | ||
* provide an '''ideal chronology table''', so the community knows what to report and how to report it. | * provide an '''ideal chronology table''', so the community knows what to report and how to report it. | ||
* provide separate recommendations for new and legacy datasets | * provide separate recommendations for new and legacy datasets | ||
| − | While it is recognized that most real-word chronologies are of mixed types (e.g. a Holocene lake sediment chronology may blend radiocarbon dates, {{SimpleNuclide2|Lead|210}} dates, and volcanic ash markers), it is critical to first define guidelines for how to report ''pure'' chronologies. Once the foundations are sound, they will be easier to compose together. | + | While it is recognized that most real-word chronologies are of mixed types (e.g. a Holocene lake sediment chronology may blend radiocarbon dates, {{SimpleNuclide2|Lead|210}} dates, and volcanic ash markers), it is critical to first define guidelines for how to report ''pure'' chronologies. Once the foundations are sound, they will be easier to compose together. |
| − | + | ||
== Tie-point chronologies == | == Tie-point chronologies == | ||
Revision as of 20:53, 15 September 2016
Contents
Overview
In the Linked Earth context, a working group (WG) is a self-organized coalition of knowledgeable experts, whose activities are governed herewith. This page is dedicated to the discussion of data and metadata standards for chronologies, and aims to formulate a set of recommendations for such a standard.
This WG needs to work closely with other WGs, as constraints will vary by archive. Nevertheless, some aspects are common enough that it is worth pursuing some general recommendations, and devise ad hoc adjustments for individual archives if need be. It is recommended that every WG coordinator join this WG to keep track of discussions.
Members of 'Chronologies Working Group'
This working group has 18 members.
Specific tasks
We recommend that discussions focus on the following techniques, and explore potential commonalities.
For each chronology type, we recommend:
- structuring discussions around what scientific questions one would want to ask of the data
- listing essential, recommended, and optional information for:
- the age models themselves - the chronological measurements (data table)
- provide an ideal chronology table, so the community knows what to report and how to report it.
- provide separate recommendations for new and legacy datasets
While it is recognized that most real-word chronologies are of mixed types (e.g. a Holocene lake sediment chronology may blend radiocarbon dates, 210Pb dates, and volcanic ash markers), it is critical to first define guidelines for how to report pure chronologies. Once the foundations are sound, they will be easier to compose together.
Tie-point chronologies
Radiocarbon
link to existing standards/templates
Lead
no known existing standard/template
U-series
Layer-counted chronologies
Comboul et al[1] argue that it is critical to report uncertainties in layer-counted chronologies, and that these can be expressed in terms of an undercounting and overcounting rate. However, there needs to be agreement about how to measure and report this rate for various archives.
Varves
Growth rings
Trees, corals, speleothems
Ice layers
Role of flow models.
Polls
Here are polls that the group might want to consider:
For NEW DATASETS: (this is a dummy poll; please update)
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.
For LEGACY DATASETS:
You are not entitled to view results of this poll.
References
- ↑ Comboul, M., J. Emile-Geay, M. N. Evans, N. Mirnateghi, K. M. Cobb, and D. M. Thompson (2014), A probabilistic model of chronological errors in layer-counted climate proxies: applications to annually banded coral archives, Climate of the Past, 10(2), 825–841, doi:10.5194/cp-10-825-2014
Pages in category "Chronologies Working Group"
This category contains only the following page.
