A two-dimensional hydrodynamic model of the St. Clair-Detroit River waterway in the Great Lakes basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The St. Clair–Detroit River Waterway connects Lake Huron with Lake Erie in the Great Lakes basin to form part of the international boundary between the United States and Canada. A two-dimensional hydrodynamic model is developed to compute flow velocities and water levels as part of a source-water assessment of public water intakes. The model, which uses the generalized finite-element code RMA2, discretizes the waterway into a mesh formed by 13,783 quadratic elements defined by 42,936 nodes. Seven steadystate scenarios are used to calibrate the model by adjusting parameters associated with channel roughness in 25 material zones in sub-areas of the waterway. An inverse modeling code is used to systematically adjust model parameters and to determine their associated uncertainty by use of nonlinear regression. Calibration results show close agreement between simulated and expected flows in major channels and water levels at gaging stations. Sensitivity analyses describe the amount of information available to estimate individual model parameters, and quantify the utility of flow measurements at selected cross sections and water-level measurements at gaging stations. Further data collection, model calibration analysis, and grid refinements are planned to assess and enhance two-dimensional flow simulation capabilities describing the horizontal flow distributions in St. Clair and Detroit Rivers and circulation patterns in Lake St. Clair.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 teacher head, 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".