MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085325547 · doi:10.1139/l06-037

An experimental study into local scour in a channel caused by a 90° bend

2006· article· en· W2085325547 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jueyi Sui, Bryan Karney

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFroude numberFlumeGeotechnical engineeringChannel (broadcasting)ErosionGeologyFlow (mathematics)BedformHydraulicsHydraulic structureOpen-channel flowEngineeringGeomorphologyGeometrySediment transportSedimentMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on a series of experiments, this paper explores the influence of a 90° change in flow direction on local scouring. The influence on local scour patterns due to hydraulic parameters such as the Froude number, the slope of the protection wall, the width of the protection apron along the outside wall of the downstream section, and the grain size of the channel bed material is examined. Protection-wall slopes ranging from 1:0.5 to 1:4 (vertical to horizontal) were investigated, as were different widths of the protection apron; the goal was to ascertain the role of these variables in local scour patterns in the vicinity of the bend. The factors affecting local scour depth are related through empirical equations to key hydraulic variables, the slope of the protection wall, and the width of the protection apron.Key words: bent flume, channel erosion, Froude number, scour depth, slope of protection wall (SPW), width of protection apron (WPA).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207