Bank Vegetation, Bank Strength, and Application of the University of British Columbia Regime Model to Stream Restoration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The University of British Columbia Regime Model (UBCRM) is based on rational regime theory. A feature of the model is that it quantifies the effect of bank vegetation and its effect on channel geometry. Three bank vegetation models can be applied to gravel bed rivers with either noncohesive, cohesive, or composite banks. Simplified dimensionless equations for width and slope derived using the UBCRM are applied to a site on the Coldwater River, British Columbia. Between 1953 and 2003, there were significant land use changes that included riparian and floodplain clearing. The observed widening and steepening can be explained by a reduction in bank strength and that changes in the sediment load, discharge, or grain size do not appear to be significant. Applied correctly, the UBCRM can provide qualitative and quantitative insight into the primary causes of historic disturbance and can serve as an aid in restoration design. Because of the physically based nature of the parameters in the UBCRM, analysis and design are directly linked to fluvial processes including flow resistance, sediment transport, and bank stability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".