MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1819170614

Research into protection of rockfill dams from overtopping using rockfill downstream toes

2011· article· en· W1819170614 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rafael Morán Moya, Á ToledoMiguel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDam Engineering and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDownstream (manufacturing)LeveeHydraulicsGeotechnical engineeringDam failureEngineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceFlood myth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main cause of rockfill and embankment dam failures is overtopping due to insufficient outlet works. During the last 15 years, the Civil Engineering Department: Hydraulics and Energy of the Technical University of Madrid has been studying the overtopping failure process of rockfill dams. One of the aims of this research is to develop design criteria of cost-effective rockfill dam protections to avoid failure due to such overtopping. Among the different types of known protection, this analysis has focused on downstream rockfill toes. The objective of this study is to achieve stability of the downstream shell of rockfill dams to prevent mass slides. This article summarizes the results of the preliminary experimental and numerical tests developed during the year 2008. Preliminary conclusions show the feasibility of this protection to mitigate partially or totally the serious consequences of overtopping in rockfill dams.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicDam Engineering and SafetyFrench-language works237,207