A review of the classification of landslides of the flow type
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Other designConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.956
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.301
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
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)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Abstract As a result of the widespread use of the landslide classifications of Varnes (1978), and Hutchinson (1988), certain terms describing common types of flow-like mass movements have become entrenched in the language of engineering geology. Example terms include debris flow, debris avalanche and mudslide. Here, more precise definitions of the terms are proposed, which would allow the terms to be retained with their original meanings while making their application less ambiguous. A new division of landslide materials is proposed, based on genetic and morphological aspects rather than arbitrary grain-size limits. The basic material groups include sorted materials: gravel, sand, silt, and clay, unsorted materials: debris, earth and mud, peat and rock. Definitions are proposed for relatively slow non-liquefied sand or gravel flows, extremely rapid sand, silt or debris flow slides accompanied by liquefaction, clay flow slides involving extra-sensitive clays, peat flows, slow to rapid earth flows in nonsensitive plastic clays, debris flows which occur in steep established channels or gullies, mud flows considered as cohesive debris flows, debris floods involving massive sediment transport at limited discharges, debris avalanches which occur on open hill slopes and rock avalanches formed by large scale failures of bedrock.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Environmental and Engineering Geoscience
- Topic
- Landslides and related hazards
- Field
- Environmental Science
- Canadian institutions
- University of British Columbia
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Debris flowLandslideDebrisGeologySiltMudflowHyperconcentrated flowGeotechnical engineeringBedrockFlumeLiquefactionSedimentGeomorphologyLandslide classificationFlow (mathematics)Sediment transportBed load
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes