MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2095107530 · doi:10.1115/imece2007-43584

3-D Simulation of Sedimentation in Turbidity Currents

2007· article· en· W2095107530 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Hormozi, Bahar Firoozabadi, H. Ghasvari Jahromi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbidity currentSettlingSedimentationTurbidityMechanicsTurbulenceParticle (ecology)Current (fluid)InflowParticle densityFlow velocityFlow (mathematics)GeologyPhysicsGeomorphologySedimentThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gravity currents on the inclined boundaries are formed when the inflow fluid has a density difference with the ambient fluid and a tangential component of gravity becomes the driving force. If the density difference arises from the suspended particles, the currents are known as particle-laden density currents, or turbidity currents in which the local density depends on the concentration of particles. A low Reynolds k-ε turbulent model is used to simulate three dimensional turbidity currents. Also some laboratory tests were conducted to study the 3D flow resulting from the release of particle laden density currents on a sloping surface in a channel of freshwater via a sluice gate. Kaolin was used as the suspended material. The height, width, velocity and concentration profiles of turbidity currents were calculated and compared with the experimental data and showed good agreement. Different settling velocity formulas based on, first, solitary particle and, second, considering the effect of dispersed particles thorough the fluid are exerted in the concentration equation and the results compare with each other. Also the sedimentation heights of the turbidity current are simulated which are compatible with the experimental data.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological formations and processes→French-language works237,207→