MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967383988 · doi:10.4236/jwarp.2012.410096

Relative Depth Effects on Corrugated Culvert Roughness

2012· article· en· W1967383988 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Scott Toews, Shawn P. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Resource and Protection · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaManitoba Hydro
KeywordsCulvertHydraulic roughnessSurface finishFlow (mathematics)Geotechnical engineeringApproximation errorEnvironmental scienceGeologyMechanicsMaterials scienceGeometryMathematicsComposite materialPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fish passage is important to the overall health of an ecosystem. Therefore, it is important to be able to accurately predict flow conditions within a stream crossing for high and low flow periods. This paper evaluates the effect of relative water depth on the hydraulic roughness of culverts at low discharge. A 21 m long, 0.8 m diameter corrugated steel pipe with 0.068 × 0.013 m annular corrugations was used. For relative depths below 0.5, Manning’s n was found to increase with decreasing relative depth. An equation was developed to predict relative depths below 0.5 within a corrugated steel pipe based on the corrugation height, slope and culvert diameter. While Manning’s equation does perform reasonably well, the percent difference from the measured to predicted water levels warrants the use of an additional prediction method at low flows.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Resource and ProtectionSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207