Overtopping risk assessment in river diversion facility design
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diversion canals supplemented with upstream and downstream cofferdams are constructed to divert river flow for the construction of diversion weirs. Insufficient canal capacity leads to overtopping of water from the crest of the upstream cofferdam and sides of the diversion canal, which is regarded as the dominant risk mode in the system. A dynamic reliability model, which is based on a resistance-loading methodology with random independent loading following a Poisson process and random fixed resistance, may be used to assess the risk levels for various return periods and construction duration of a diversion weir. The system resistance is considered as the maximum canal capacity described by a lognormal probability density function. The river flow rate corresponding to a certain return period is considered as the external loading on the system. In a case study, a dynamic reliability analysis is performed for a diversion facility. From a flood flow frequency analysis, log-Pearson type 3 distribution is selected to describe the loading. The relationships between the total cost of the diversion facility, its reliability, safety, and duration of construction are examined in a decision making framework.Key words: dynamic reliability, diversion facility, resistance, loading.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it