Behaviour of debris flows located in a mountainous torrent on the Ohya landslide, Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although information on the behaviour of debris flow in the initiation zone is important for the development of mitigative measures, field data regarding this behaviour are scarce. This research examines the behaviour of debris flow in the initiation zone, based on field observations in the upper Ichinosawa catchment of the Ohya landslide in Japan. In spring 1998, a monitoring system, consisting of video cameras, ultrasonic sensors, capacitive water depth probes, and water pressure sensors (WPS), was installed to assess the behaviour of debris flows in the initiation zone. On the basis of video image analysis, we found that main flow phases during debris-flow events consisted of flow containing largely muddy water and flow containing largely cobbles and boulders. Data obtained from ultrasonic sensors and WPS show that the former flow type (muddy flow) has large amounts of interstitial water throughout its mass, whereas the latter flow type has an unsaturated layer in the upper portion. Results indicate that the concentration of solids in debris flows differs from flow to flow. Debris flows in the upper Ichinosawa catchment cause both erosion and deposition and exhibit changes in their concentration of solids.Key words: debris flow, Ohya landslide, flow behaviour, observation, initiation zone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".