MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133311755 · doi:10.1061/9780784413067.022

Performance of Constructed Habitat Beach

2013· article· en· W2133311755 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Simpson, John Klekotka

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsBulkhead (partition)ShoreGradationGeologyCobblePort (circuit theory)Beach nourishmentRiprapRevetmentGeotechnical engineeringHydrology (agriculture)OceanographyHabitatEngineeringEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Port of Everett constructed an 1,100-ft (335-m) long, coarse-grain beachi n 2005-2006 to provide environmental benefit, shore protection, and public access as part of a pier construction project. The former beach surface intersected a rock bulkhead at elevations far below MHHW. A new beach was constructed with crest 30 ft (9 m) wide and 1.5 ft (0.5 m) above MHHW. The eastern end transitioned at the Port property line into the pre-existing rock bulkhead and had only a low sill to control down-drift loss of placed beach material. The Port of Everett performed monitoring of the beach sediments, profile shape, and biology over a period of seven years, and is continuing the program. Physical monitoring shows that the central portion of the beach has maintained its dimensions. Volume change of the overall beach has been minimal. Surface material gradation varies with time and is generally maintaining a gradation representing the original sandy gravelly mixture. Monitoring shows the design process produced a successful constructed beach.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207