Une modélisation théorique nouvelle de la rupture par submersion d'une digue en terre et sa validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the EROBAR numerical model on breach formation in earth-fill dams during an overtopping flow. Hydraulics of flow over an earth-fill dam is considered as the basis for the comprehension of the breach formation process. To this will be added the mastery of the erosion mechanism and of widening of the breach canal. As the breach formation process in an earth-fill dam is very complex, the EROBAR model was the object of a two-step formulation, with the two steps joined later. The first step deals with the flow hydraulics, vertical erosion, and longitudinal evolution of the profile of the dam. The second step introduces the widening of the breach, based on the instability of the breach slope. After the two formulations were joined and validated, the EROBAR model was applied to the experimental dyke, to several homogenous earth-fill dams with or without protection, and to zoned dams.Key words: dam failure, breach erosion, earth-fill dam breach, overtopped earth dam, numerical model.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".