MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061187725 · doi:10.4043/25705-ms

Quantification of Near-bed Dense Layers and Implications for Seafloor Structures: New Insights into the Most Hazardous Aspects of Turbidity Currents

2015· article· en· W2061187725 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersDeltares
KeywordsTurbidity currentSeafloor spreadingGeologySedimentTurbidityBedformGeophysicsSediment transportSoil scienceGeomorphologyOceanographySedimentary depositional environment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Turbidity currents pose a serious hazard to expensive oil and gas seafloor installations, especially in deep-water where mitigation, re-routing or repair is costly and logistically challenging. These sediment-laden flows are hazardous because they can be exceptionally powerful (up to 20 m/s), and can flow for long distances (>100s km) over several days duration, causing damage over vast areas of seafloor. Even less powerful flows (~1-2 m/s) can damage seafloor equipment, or break strategically important submarine telecommunication cables. The consequences of turbidity currents impacting seafloor structures depends on the velocity, duration, direction of impact and, perhaps most crucially, the sediment concentration (or density) of the flow. While some recent studies have successfully monitored turbidity currents in deep-water, imaging flow properties close to the seafloor has proven problematic. We present innovative approaches to the quantification of the velocity and sediment concentration of dense near-bed layers that provide new insights into this important aspect of turbidity current flow. Firstly, we describe a novel experimental setup that is capable of measuring near-bed sediment concentration in dense (>10% volume by concentration) flows. Density contrasts are measured using Electrical Resistivity Tomography – a technique initially developed for geophysical characterisation of subsurface reservoirs. Velocity is measured using Ultrasonic Doppler Velocity Profiling and concentration is characterized using an Ultra High Concentration Meter. Secondly, we outline some recently developed geophysical approaches for the quantification of sediment concentration and velocity for real-world flows based on recent work in fjords, estuaries and deep-sea canyons. This includes integrated moored deployments of Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers, Multibeam Sonars, and a novel Chirp array. We outline some limitations and advantages of these methods. Finally, we underline the value and importance of establishing multiple field-scale test sites in a variety of settings, including deep-water, that will enhance the industry's understanding of turbidity current hazards. Our results demonstrate the importance of near-bed dense layers for turbidity current interaction with seafloor structures. Density contrasts and pressure build up at the base of a flow may lead to uplift, undermining and loss of support, dragging, or pipeline rupture; hence quantification of this layer is crucial for hazard assessment. Measurements of sediment concentration within turbidity currents are incredibly rare, and yet are a vital input for any numerical model that aims to predict sediment transport by turbidity currents in deep-water settings. Currently it is necessary to infer densities and velocities; however, such inferences are poorly calibrated against experimental or real world data. Our measurements underline the importance of understanding near-bed dense layers.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.224 · 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