MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of the Stability of Floating Ice Blocks

2011· article· en· W2110189591 on OpenAlexafffund
Karen E. Dow Ambtman, P. M. Steffler, Faye Hicks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Diagnostics and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyStability (learning theory)Hydrology (agriculture)Geotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeomorphologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining the conditions under which an approaching ice floe becomes entrained under an intact ice cover is a fundamental component of any numerical model that attempts to successfully predict ice-jam formation or ice-jam release events. Current stability theory is based on empirical relationships that attempt to characterize stability on the basis of Froude number. This paper seeks to evaluate the stability of floating ice blocks though a force-moment analysis, building on previously published experimental results that measured the dynamic pressures beneath a floating ice block under various thickness-to-depth ratios and flow velocities. The experimental results were extended to measure the dynamic pressures beneath a block that had rotated about its downstream corner until the top upstream corner was at the water surface elevation, giving an indication of how the submerging force and underturning moment changes as the block begins to rotate. The force-moment analyses developed in this paper were compared with previously published observations of block entrainment and were found to match those observations well.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicEngineering Diagnostics and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207