Elevation adjustments of paired natural levees during flooding of the Saskatchewan River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Natural levees control the exchange of water between an alluvial channel and its floodplain, but little is known about the spatial distribution and evolution of levee heights. The summer 2005 flood of the Saskatchewan River (Cumberland Marshes, east‐central Saskatchewan) inundated large areas of floodplain for up to seven weeks, forming prominent new deposits on natural levees along main‐stem channels. Measurements of flood‐deposit thickness and crest heights of 61 levee pairs show that the thickest deposits occur on the lower pre‐flood levee in 80% of the sites, though no clear relationship exists between deposit thickness and magnitude of height difference. Only 16% of the pairs displayed thicker deposits on the higher levee, half of which occurred at sites where relatively clear floodbasin waters re‐entered turbid channels during general flooding. Difference in crest elevation (Δ E ) between paired levees is approximately log‐normally distributed, both before and after the flood, though with different mean values. Supplemental observations from tank experiments indicate that during near‐bankfull flows, temporally and spatially variable deposition and erosion occur on levees due to backwater effects associated with nearby channel bars and irregular rises of the channel bed forced by channel extension. During floods, preferential deposition in lows tends to even out crest heights. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".