MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047045095 · doi:10.1139/x01-070

The characteristics of woody debris and sediment distribution in headwater streams, southeastern Alaska

2001· article· en· W2047045095 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Takashi Gomi, Roy C. Sidle, Mason D. Bryant, Richard D. Woodsmith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPacific Northwest Research StationU.S. Forest ServiceU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsDebrisSTREAMSLarge woody debrisSedimentLoggingHydrology (agriculture)LandslideGeologyCoarse woody debrisDeposition (geology)Environmental scienceGeomorphologyEcologyForestryHabitatGeographyOceanographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large woody debris (LWD), fine woody debris (FWD), fine organic debris (FOD), and sediment deposition were measured in 15 steep headwater streams with five management and disturbance regimes. Clear-cut channels logged in 1995 contained large accumulations of logging residue that initially provided sites for sediment storage. Half of the LWD in clear-cut channels was recruited during and immediately after logging. Woody debris from logging activities remains in young growth conifer channels 37 years after logging. Numbers of LWD in clear-cut and young conifer channels were significantly higher than in old-growth channels, although numbers of FWD pieces were not significantly different because of higher recruitment from old-growth stands. Channels that experienced recent (1979 and (or) 1993) and earlier (1961 and (or) 1979) scour and runout of landslides and debris flows contained less LWD and FWD, although large volumes of LWD and FWD were found in deposition zones. The volumes of sediment stored in young alder and recent landslide channels were higher than in the other channels. Because of the recruitment of LWD and FWD from young alder stands, the ratio of sediment stored behind woody debris to total sediment volume was higher in young alder channels compared with recent landslide channels. Numbers of LWD and FWD pieces in all streams were significantly correlated with the volumes of sediment stored behind woody debris. Timber harvesting and soil mass movement influence the recruitment, distribution, and accumulation of woody debris in headwater streams; this modifies sediment storage and transport in headwater channels.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207