MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of temperature and humidity upon the transport of sedimentary particles by wind

2004· article· en· W2094888434 on OpenAlexafffund
Cheryl McKenna Neuman

Bibliographic record

VenueSedimentology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersTrent University
KeywordsAeolian processesAtmospheric sciencesExtrapolationHumidityWind speedGeologySedimentary rockRelative humidityTurbulenceEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyGeomorphologyOceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wind tunnel simulations of aeolian transport carried out over a range in mean temperature between 32 °C and −9 °C suggest that cold airflows support higher mass transport rates ( Q ) than very warm air. The magnitude of this increase is larger than expected, so that analytical and semi‐empirical models underestimate Q . Extrapolation of the results suggests that, at −40 °C, as for example in the dry valleys of Antarctica in winter, Q may be as much as 70% higher than for the equivalent wind speed in hot deserts at air temperatures of 40 °C. Temperature‐dependent changes in air density and turbulence contribute to this result. The decreased tension of water adsorbed onto particle surfaces at low temperatures is postulated to reduce interparticle cohesion and, thus, to increase the elasticity of particle impacts on cold beds. Definition of the roles that temperature and humidity play in aeolian transport is relevant to studies of palaeoenvironmental reconstruction and extraterrestrial (or planetary) geology. Investigation of present‐day, cold climate features and of climate change effects also requires knowledge of these fundamental relations.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations200
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSedimentologySame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207