MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1871478878 · doi:10.1002/esp.3528

Flume‐ and field‐based evaluation of a time‐integrated suspended sediment sampler for the analysis of sediment properties

2014· article· en· W1871478878 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Surface Processes and Landforms · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSedimentFlumeHydrology (agriculture)SettlingEnvironmental scienceGeologySedimentary budgetSedimentationSediment transportGeomorphologyEnvironmental engineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Suspended sediment has been identified as a vector for nutrient and contaminant transport in the fluvial environment. A time‐integrated sampler (the Phillips sampler), which emerged over a decade ago as a cost‐effective tool for in situ suspended sediment collection, is increasingly being used to collect samples for the analysis of sediment properties such as particle size composition, and nutrient and contaminant concentrations. This study evaluates the sampler under both flume and field conditions for efficiency in the mass and grain size of the suspended sediment collected. The sampler was tested in a flume using both kaolinite and sediment samples (sieved to < 180 µm) collected from the Quesnel River, British Columbia, Canada. In the kaolinite trails, the sampler preferentially collected coarser grain sizes compared to the original sediment, probably due to finer sediment remaining in suspension and therefore passing through the sampler, and also possibly due to flocculation of the kaolinite upon introduction to the flume. Conversely, the sampler collected river sediment that was finer than the original sediment, probably due to some settling of coarser sediment observed at the bottom of the flume. Once allowance was made for these operational issues associated with the flume, maximum sediment mass efficiency for kaolinite and river sediment was 43% and 87%, respectively. Sediment collected by the time‐integrated sampler during field deployment and adjacent channel bed sediment were also compared. The sampler collected sediment with a representative grain size distribution. However, there were differences in the geochemical (arsenic and selenium) concentrations of channel bed sediment and sediment collected by the Phillips sampler which may be a function of differences in the behavior of geochemical elements associated with the two types of sediment. This work suggests that further research is needed to evaluate the role of the Phillips sampler in collecting sediment for contaminant and nutrient analysis. Copyright © 2014 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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.217 · 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