The effect of the pool and riffle on dissolved, non-conservative mass transport in rivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One-dimensional substance transport models assume that the river reach modelled has a uniform cross-sectional shape which manifests as a constant average velocity in the model equations. Rarely do rivers meet this criterion. Their channels are seldom uniform in shape but rather alternate in a quasi-periodic manner between pool and riffle sections. This bedform sequencing imparts a corresponding variation in the average cross-sectional velocity which is not accounted for in constant velocity transport models. The literature points out that the pool and riffle planform may be the reason for the sometimes poor predictions obtained from these models. This paper presents a new variable velocity transport model and confirms that the fluctuation in average cross-sectional velocity caused by the pool and riffle planform does have a marked effect on transport in rivers. The pool and riffle planform promotes an enhanced decay of a substance when a first-order biochemical reaction is simulated with the new transport equation. Investigation of the analytical solution shows that the enhanced decay is the result of the overall lower velocity experienced in a pool and riffle channel as opposed to a uniform channel. This difference in transport velocity between a pool and riffle channel and a uniform channel becomes more pronounced as flow declines a critical finding for total maximum daily load calculations because these regulatory limits are usually determined for low flow levels by models that do not account for this phenomenon.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".