Interchannel hydraulic geometry and hydraulic efficiency of the anastomosing Columbia River, southeastern British Columbia, Canada
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
Abstract The morphodynamics of the anastomosing channel system of upper Columbia River in southeastern British Columbia, Canada, is examined using an adaptation of conventional hydraulic geometry termed ‘interchannel hydraulic geometry’. Interchannel hydraulic geometry has some of the characteristics of downstream hydraulic geometry but differs in that it describes the general bankfull channel form and hydraulics of primary and secondary channels in the anastomosing channel system. Interchannel hydraulic geometry generalizes these relationships and as such becomes a model of the geomorphology of channel division and combination. Interchannel hydraulic geometry of upper Columbia River, based on field measurements of flow velocity and channel form at 16 test sections, is described well by simple power functions: w bf = 3·24 Q bf 0·64 ; d bf = 1·04 Q bf 0·19 ; v bf = 0·30 Q bf 0·17 . These results, with other related measurements of flow resistance, imply that channel splitting leads to hydraulic inefficiency (higher flow resistance) on the anastomosing Columbia River. Because these findings differ from those reported in studies elsewhere, we conclude that hydraulic efficiency does not provide a general explanation for anabranching in river channels. Copyright © 2003 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 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