MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142188817 · doi:10.1002/esp.3240

Implementation and validation of video monitoring for wood budgeting in a wandering piedmont river, the Ain River (France)

2012· article· en· W2142188817 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce MacVicar, Hervé Piégay

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Surface Processes and Landforms · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrographHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceRating curveFloodplainHabitatPhysical geographyFlood mythGeologyArchaeologyEcologyGeographyGeotechnical engineeringGeomorphologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The transport of wood in rivers during floods is an important process that underlies differences in habitat and morphology between water courses and regions. Quantitative data are needed to properly address management objectives and balance wood budgets. In this study we use a streamside video camera to detect wood passage and measure quasi‐instantaneous rates of wood transport in the Ain River, France. The objectives are to verify the procedure, describe the relation between wood transport and discharge, and construct and validate a wood budget for the reach upstream of the camera. Verification of the procedure includes tests of detection frequency, wood velocity, and piece size. A log base two transformation is proposed to classify wood by piece length. It was found that a wood transport threshold occurs at approximately two thirds of the bankfull discharge. Wood transport follows a positive linear relation with discharge up to the bankfull discharge but is both more variable and less sensitive to discharge when the floodplain is inundated. Transport rates are approximately four times higher on the rising limb of the hydrograph than on the falling limb. Wood transport estimates from a three‐stage rating curve are two to 10 times higher than those from a wood budget using local and aerial surveys of upstream dynamics. Future work should address uncertainties related to wood diameter measurements, sampling length and frequency, and antecedent floods. Copyright © 2012 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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations115
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Surface Processes and LandformsSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207