Experimental Research on Floodplain Storage Inundation: Preliminary Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among control structures in flood management, floodplain storage represents one of the most effective measures, since they hold part of flood volume into a delimited area, thus reducing the peak discharge. One-dimensional models are quick and practical and are often based on the hypothesis of horizontal water surface in the floodplain during storage filling. This assumption need to be verified by means of experimental test, which are really difficult to assess also because tests requiring many costs to achieve prototypes and physical models. To this aim the present paper shows preliminary results of an experimental investigation to assess the reliability of level pool routing in design of on-stream floodplain storages. Experimental tests performed with reference to on-stream floodplain prototype, showed that assumed hypothesis is correct during storage filling. Results obtained by means of numerical model based on level pool routing hypothesis are very near to experimental measures. Furthermore two synthetic indexes, which characterize hydraulic behavior of floodplain storage, were calculated for each test. It is shown that very simple linear relationship exists between these two indexes exists so this linear equation can be easily used to define the storage volume in preliminary design.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".