Hydraulic geometry of secondary channels of lower Fraser River, British Columbia, from acoustic Doppler profiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hydraulics and morphology of secondary channels within the lower Fraser River gravel reach were examined using data collected with an acoustic Doppler profiler during the large 2002 freshet. Data were collected over an area of channel (“subreach”), for a range of subreach morphologies (“upstream,” “mid,” and “downstream”). As suggested by visual evidence, at‐a‐station hydraulic geometry of subreach types stratified along gradients of width, depth, and velocity. Fish habitat is more abundant and more persistently available in the wide, deep downstream subreaches, but higher velocities preferred by some species occur in the mid stream and upstream subreaches. Additional high‐flow data, used to develop bank‐full scaling relations (classical “downstream” hydraulic geometry), conformed well to a simple power law up to and including data points from the main channel. However, width and depth exponents deviated from classical results. Investigation suggests that the relations observed in this study approach expected relations for constant slope and channel boundary materials.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 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".