MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004546321 · doi:10.1002/esp.1831

Form and growth of bars in a wandering gravel‐bed river

2009· article· en· W2004546321 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Surface Processes and Landforms · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyChannel (broadcasting)Context (archaeology)AlluviumPlanformPoint barBar (unit)ScalingScale (ratio)FloodplainShoalFluvialHydrology (agriculture)GeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringPaleontologyGeometryGeographyMathematicsMechanicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The changing form of developing alluvial river bars has rarely been studied in the field, especially in the context of the fixed, compound, mainly alternate gravel bars that are the major morphological feature of the wandering style. Century scale patterns of three‐dimensional growth and development, and the consequent scaling relations of such bars, are examined along the gravel‐bed reach of lower Fraser River, British Columbia, Canada. A retrospective view based on maps and aerial photographs obtained through the twentieth century shows that individual bars have a life history of about 100 years, except in certain, protected positions. A newly formed gravel bar quickly assumes its ultimate thickness and relatively quickly approaches its equilibrium length. Growth continues mainly by lateral accretion of unit bars, consistent with the lateral style of instability of the river. Bar growth is therefore allometric. Mature bars approach equilibrium dimensions and volume that scale with the overall size of the channel. Accordingly, the bars conform with several published criteria for the ultimate dimensions of alternate barforms. Sand bars, observed farther downstream, have notably different morphology. Fraser River presents a typical wandering channel planform, exhibiting elements of both meandered and low‐order braided channels. Hydraulic criteria to which the Fraser bars conform illustrate why this planform develops and persists. The modest rate of bed material transfer along the channel – typical of the wandering type – determines a century‐length time scale for bar development. This time scale is consistent with estimates that have been made for change of the macroform elements that determine the overall geometry of alluvial channels. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.188 · 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