MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2181452914 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2015-0211

Shear and normal stresses measured on the Weissfluhjoch Snow Chute

2015· article· en· W2181452914 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marius Schaefer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSnowMechanicsShear stressShear (geology)Geotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceFlow (mathematics)MaximaGeologyComposite materialPhysicsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shear stresses on the running surface are believed to crucially determine the flow of snow avalanches. Measurements of shear and normal stresses on the running surface are presented as well as measurements of flow depth of snow flows down the Weissfluhjoch Snow Chute before and after a reduction of the chute’s inclination. In the measurements before the inclination change, maxima of measured normal stresses agreed with the maxima of the normal component of the column weight calculated using pre-release snow density. After the reduction of inclination, stresses increased considerably and the magnitude of the increase depended on the density of the flow. Using the measurements of normal stress and flow depth before the inclination change, a depth-averaged flow density was computed. The flow density was lower in the front and the tail of the avalanches and approached the pre-release density in the avalanche body. The ratio of measured shear to normal stresses, the coefficient of friction, was higher in wet snow flows than in dry snow flows. Upon analysis of the dependence of the coefficient of friction on parameters varying between the experiments, higher coefficients of friction for higher densities, snow and air temperatures, and average avalanche velocities were found. The total avalanche volume correlated negatively with the coefficient of friction. Measured coefficients of friction were generally lower as expected for flows of constant velocity, which might indicate the importance of other frictional processes such as friction at the snow–air interface, which is supported by the evolution of small dilute snow clouds on top of the flows that consisted of dry snow.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→