Determination of the sediment transport in an armoured gravel‐bed river
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Information about sediment transport in the Common Meuse, an armoured gravel‐bed river, can be obtained by the determination of the relationship between sediment transport and discharge and integrating the relationship with respect to time, or by computing the differences between series of measured bed‐levels along the Common Meuse and integrating these differences. For three periods of 9, 8 and 17 years sediment transport computations are made with two series of relationships between sediment transport ( Q b ) and discharge ( Q ) in which the condition of the armour layer is taken into account. These sediment‐transport–discharge ( Q b & sol ; Q ) relationships are determined by local bed‐load transport measurements in the Common Meuse. At the beginning and the end of the first period (1978–1987) and at the end of the second period (1987–1995) bed levels have been measured by soundings. By the analysis of the measured bed levels at the beginning and the end of the two periods the sediment transport along the Common Meuse is estimated. The same analysis was carried out for the combined period (1978–1995). The yearly mean sediment transport computed by these two methods are compared. The necessity of carrying out bed‐load transport measurements at several locations in a cross‐section and over the entire range of discharges is clearly shown. Attention is paid to the advantages and disadvantages of the two methods and the need for applying more than one method to compute sediment transport. Copyright © 2001 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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".