MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1501672861 · doi:10.1002/esp.3231

Morphodynamics of an extended bar complex, Fraser River, British Columbia

2012· article· en· W1501672861 on OpenAlexaffabout
Darren Ham, Michael Church

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Surface Processes and Landforms · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeach morphodynamicsSediment transportGeologyErosionChannel (broadcasting)River regimeDeposition (geology)SedimentHydrology (agriculture)Bank erosionFlooding (psychology)SedimentationScale (ratio)OceanographyPhysical geographyGeomorphologyGeographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We investigate large‐scale morphologic changes over a 65‐year period in a major sedimentation zone within the 50‐km long wandering gravel‐bed reach of lower Fraser River, British Columbia. This reach remains in a relatively pristine state compared with many major rivers in populated regions even though various forms of human interference have occurred over the past century to mitigate flooding and erosion concerns. A template of channel evolutionary development is identified, consisting of extended periods of orderly accretion of unit bars by deposition of gravel sheets, controlled by the major riffles in the river. When this process constricts channel conveyance an avulsion occurs and the major bar complexes are reorganized. The recognition of fairly predictable short‐term behavior can potentially aid the development of models of sediment transport and channel evolution. Accordingly, results of the detailed descriptive analysis are compared with a GIS‐based probabilistic approach developed from transition‐state analysis. This reveals that the river has a far stronger tendency to retain its existing morphology than to change its form within a roughly decennial time scale – regardless of the magnitude of intervening flows – but that this tendency gradually declines over time as major bar and island complexes are re‐worked by sediment exchange. The timescale for major bar development appears to be of the order 30 years, while complete sediment exchange occurs within a century. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Surface Processes and LandformsSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207