MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050648454 · doi:10.1139/l07-041

Three-dimensional study of spatial submerged hydraulic jump

2007· article· en· W2050648454 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H. K. Zare, R. E. Baddour

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic jumpFroude numberJumpMechanicsGeologyGeometryFlow (mathematics)DissipationChannel (broadcasting)Open-channel flowVector fieldSupercritical flowJet (fluid)MathematicsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-dimensional (3D) study of spatial submerged hydraulic jumps (SSHJs) was carried out using a physical model for Froude numbers Fr1= 2.00 and 3.75 and width ratios α = 0.20 and 0.33. Three orthogonal components of the velocity field were obtained with an acoustic Doppler velocimeter (ADV). The 3D velocity field has indicated that the jump consisted of a central jet-like flow, close to the channel bottom, surrounded by vertical and horizontal circulations (rollers). The circulation was predominantly in vertical planes in the channel central region of the flow and in horizontal planes close to the walls. Vertical and horizontal profiles of stream-wise velocity characterized the 3D roller with two length scales, Lrvand Lrh. The strength of the roller was stronger close to the walls than at the centreline of the jump. Sequent depth and energy head loss for submerged symmetric hydraulic jumps are discussed in terms of the submergence ratio S = y3/y2.Key words: hydraulic jump, spatial, submerged, roller length, sequent depth, energy dissipation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.183
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicHydraulic flow and structuresFrench-language works237,207