Basin-scale availability of salmonid spawning gravel as influenced by channel type and hydraulic roughness in mountain catchments
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
A general framework is presented for examining the effects of channel type and associated hydraulic roughness on salmonid spawning-gravel availability in mountain catchments. Digital elevation models are coupled with grain-size predictions to provide basin-scale assessments of the potential extent and spatial pattern of spawning gravels. To demonstrate both the model and the significance of hydraulic roughness, we present a scenario for optimizing the spatial extent of spawning gravels as a function of channel type in Pacific Northwest catchments. Predictions indicate that hydraulic roughness could control more than 65% of the potential available spawning habitat at our study sites. Results further indicate that bar roughness can be important for maintaining spawning gravels in lower mainstem reaches, while wood roughness may be required for spawning-gravel maintenance in steeper, upper mainstem channels. Our analysis indicates that wood loss and consequent textural coarsening could deplete up to one third of the potentially usable spawning area at our study sites.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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