MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1852213114 · doi:10.1134/s0097807815050140

Tidal and prism analysis of sea reclamation project in coastal bay

2015· article· en· W1852213114 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayLand reclamationPrismHydrogeologyCoastal engineeringMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceTidal powerUnderwaterGeologyCivil engineeringComputer scienceOceanographyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mathematical model analysis is very important in investigating the water exchanges and tidal prism in the reconstruction engineering projects around coastal bay. Based on the accurate simulation of tides, the mathematical model method is more economical and efficient than traditional measurement method and physical experiment model in the first evaluation of initial design. A robust numerical model with high accuracy is explored in this study for a systematic consideration of hydraulic interactions within different water zones in coastal reconstruction project. Application of the developed tidal model to a reconstruction project in the Dalian Laohutan Bay of China is presented in details. The developed tidal model with a refined meshing algorithm has been validated through measured field data with reasonable agreement. Then, the validated model is used to examine water exchanges and the tidal prism under different engineering reconstruction scenarios. The engineering solutions that satisfy the requirements of both project demands and environmental protection have been obtained.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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