MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1454582567 · doi:10.1520/stp11558s

In situ Flume Measurements of Sediment Erodability in Saguenay Fjord (Quebec, Canada)

2003· book-chapter· en· W1454582567 on OpenAlexaffabout
AL Moreau, Jacques Locat, Philip R. Hill, Long Bao Le, Yvon Ouellet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFjordOceanographyGeologySedimentFlumePhysical geographyGeomorphologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The erodability of surficial sediment in Saguenay Fjord, Quebec, was investigated over a three-year period at fourteen sites in Baie des Ha! Ha! and the North Arm using a benthic flume, Miniflume. Previous studies showed that Saguenay Fjord sediment characteristics vary greatly on small and large scales. The critical shear stress (τc) reflect this variability, with τc between 0.07 and 0.48 Pa. The measured critical shear stress and erosion rates were consistent with those of other in situ studies in other areas. The variability in the results is linked to the great spatial variability of benthic sediments rather than to temporal variability. Some of the results were integrated in the Parchure and Mehta (1985) erosion law since the upper portion of the active sediment layer is typically a stratified bed. The identification of erosion parameters (critical shear stress, erosion rate, parameters α and Ef in erosion law) and their high variability is the first step in defining the erosion susceptibility hazard in Saguenay Fjord.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes→French-language works237,207→