MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114768743 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2012.166

Flotation and free surface flow in a model for subglacial drainage. Part 2. Channel flow

2012· article· en· W2114768743 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Hewitt, Christian Schoof, Mauro Werder

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyDrainageFlow (mathematics)Open-channel flowOverburdenChannel (broadcasting)MechanicsWater flowGeomorphologyHydrology (agriculture)PetrologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a new model of subglacial drainage incorporating flow in a network of channels and a porous sheet, with water exchange between the two determined by pressure gradients. The sheet represents the average effect of many linked cavities, whilst the channels emerge from individual cavities that enlarge due to dissipation-induced melting. The model distinguishes cases when the water pressure drops to zero, in which case it allows for the drainage space to be only partially filled with water (free surface flow), and when the pressure reaches the ice overburden pressure, in which case it allows for uplift of the ice to whatever extent is needed to accommodate the water (flotation). Numerical solutions are found for a one-dimensional flow-line version of the model. The results capture typically observed or inferred features of subglacial drainage systems, including open channel flow at the ice margin, seasonal channel evolution, and high water pressures and uplift of the ice surface driven by rapid changes in water supply.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations99
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207