MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2093461514 · doi:10.1029/2006gl028420

Effect of flow depth and velocity on the scales of macroturbulent structures in gravel‐bed rivers

2006· article· en· W2093461514 on OpenAlexaff
G. A. Marquis, André G. Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyFlow (mathematics)Range (aeronautics)ScalingFlow velocitySampling (signal processing)GeodesyHydrology (agriculture)Geotechnical engineeringGeometryMechanicsPhysicsMathematicsOpticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laboratory and field data show that the length of macroturbulent structures consistently scales with flow depth (Y). Scalings with average streamwise flow velocity (U) only exist for laboratory data. Our aim is to establish the relations between macroturbulent structures, low‐speed wedges and ejections, and U and Y in gravel‐bed rivers. Fifteen velocity profiles covering a wide range of U while controlling for Y were measured. The duration (time interval between the beginning and the end of an event) and length (distance between two successive similar events) of the macroturbulent events are analyzed. Strong scalings of the duration and length of the low‐speed wedges and ejections exist for Y. Ejection length is strongly related to U. Because the sampling design ensured the statistical independence between U and Y, these results should provide robust estimates of the scalings of macroturbulent structures in gravel‐bed rivers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes→French-language works237,207→