MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509899836 · doi:10.5772/16085

Changes in Sediment Transport of the Yellow River in the Loess Plateau

2011· book-chapter· en· W1509899836 on OpenAlexaff
Faye Hirshfield, Jueyi Sui

Bibliographic record

VenueInTech eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSedimentEnvironmental scienceErosionSedimentationHydrology (agriculture)WEPPSediment transportUrbanizationDeposition (geology)LoessRangelandGeologySoil conservationAgricultureAgroforestryGeographyGeomorphologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sediment erosion is a pressing problem throughout the world as it leads to loss of resources such as agricultural land. Soil erosion most commonly occurs as a result of the forces exerted by wind and water. Human induced landscape change can expedite soil erosion due to removal of vegetation, urbanization and rangeland grazing (to name a few). Sediment erosion can lead to increased sediment input to nearby rivers which can alter river channel morphology through increased sediment deposition. Sediment transport in rivers is also important on a global scale as sediments carry organic carbon from the land to oceans via river channels (Ludwig et al., 1996). River sediment levels depend largely on the surrounding landscape. Areas where the soil is being impacted directly through activities such as cultivation and urbanization will generally contribute large amounts of sediment to a nearby channel. As seen over the last century, high river sedimentation can lead to issues with drinking water quality and engineering structures such as reservoirs. In order to manage the landscape effectively, soil conservationists in the United States developed a universal soil loss equation during the 1950’s (Wischmeier, 1976). The soil loss of an area is calculated as follows,

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInTech eBooksSame topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207