Bibliographic record
Abstract
A hydrologic study of a meandering channel and its adjacent marshes on the south-central Louisiana coast (5 km from the Gulf of Mexico) has revealed a flow pattern different from that expected for a natural tidal channel (bayou). A network of constructed channels, ranging in size from the small trapper's channels 1.5 meter wide (called trainasses) to 30 meter wide petroleum-well access canals, has altered the hydrology of the natural bayou and the tidal regime of the adjacent marshes along the upper reaches of the bayou. Hourly water-level data, recorded at a marsh site in the upper reaches of the bayou show that the pattern of marsh inundation is characterized by sporadic flooding interspersed by long draining periods. The purpose of this study is to interpret the different flow circulation patterns observed in the bayou during two extensive field trips. These trips were in September and October 1991, during which strong continuous north and east winds prevailed. Those data are augmented by additional data sets taken in May and August 1992 and by other field observations showing the effects of man-made canals which have induced hydrologic changes in the area. These results indicate that the surface flow patterns in the upper reaches of the bayou have been decoupled from the lower reaches of the bayou because of the flow interception by man-made canals. The upper reaches of the bayou have then been filled in with sediments because of the reduction in flow velocity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.991 | 0.993 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".