MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160069095 · doi:10.1139/t10-042

Numerical modeling of underwater rockfalls

2010· article· en· W2160069095 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Dominique Turmel, Jacques Locat

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité Laval
KeywordsRockfallGeologySubmarineVolume of fluid methodTurbulenceSubmarine canyonGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsFlow (mathematics)CanyonLandslideGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A marine environment presents various settings where talus slopes are formed via gravity-driven rockfall processes similar to those existing on land. This is the case along fjords or submarine canyons, where submarine installations or natural sanctuaries, such as coral reefs, need to be protected. In submarine rockfall analysis, the effect of the ambient fluid, in addition to hydrodynamic constraints and water currents, must be considered. A finite volume model has been developed to model two-dimensional rockfall behaviour in a Newtonian fluid, such as water or air. Turbulent and incompressible flow around the moving rock is described with a pressure–velocity iterative method on a dynamic three-dimensional unstructured mesh of polyhedral cells. Pressure, shear, and turbulent forces are then applied to the moving rock. In this paper, we compare underwater rockfall behaviour with air rockfall behaviour in three different situations: free fall, bouncing on a horizontal plane, and bouncing on an inclined plane. A true-scale experiment has been conducted to validate the model. The results of various modeling suggest that, contrary to the air case, the speed of the blocks will be strongly influenced by the block density and volume.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207