MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139491022 · doi:10.1002/esp.1200

Testing bedload transport formulae using morphologic transport estimates and field data: lower Fraser River, British Columbia

2005· article· en· W2139491022 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Surface Processes and Landforms · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBed loadBathymetryContext (archaeology)Stream powerSediment transportGeologySensitivity (control systems)Hydrology (agriculture)Flow (mathematics)Field (mathematics)Channel (broadcasting)GeometryMathematicsGeomorphologySedimentComputer scienceGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Morphologic transport estimates available for a 65‐km stretch of Fraser River over the period 1952–1999 provide a unique opportunity to evaluate the performance of bedload transport formulae for a large river over decadal time scales. Formulae tested in this paper include the original and rational versions of the Bagnold formula, the Meyer‐Peter and Muller formula and a stream power correlation. The generalized approach adopted herein does not account for spatial variability in flow, bed structure and channel morphology. However, river managers and engineers, as well as those studying rivers within the context of long‐term landscape change, may find this approach satisfactory as it has minimal data requirements and provides a level of process specification that may be commensurable with longer time scales. Hydraulic geometry equations for width and depth are defined using morphologic maps based on aerial photography and bathymetric survey data. Comparison of transport predictions with bedload transport measurements completed at Mission indicates that the original Bagnold formula most closely approximates the main trends in the field data. Sensitivity analyses are conducted to evaluate the impact of inaccuracies in input variables width, depth, slope and grain size on transport predictions. The formulae differ in their sensitivity to input variables and between reaches. Average annual bedload transport predictions for the four formulae show that they vary between each other as well as from the morphologic transport estimates. The original Bagnold and Meyer‐Peter and Muller formulae provide the best transport predictions, although the former underestimates while the latter overestimates transport rates. Based on our findings, an error margin of up to an order of magnitude can be expected when adopting generalized approaches for the prediction of bedload transport. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.209 · 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