MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296502156 · doi:10.1002/2015wr017348

Use of ADCPs for suspended sediment transport monitoring: An empirical approach

2016· article· en· W2296502156 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeremy G. Venditti, Michael Church, M. E. Attard, D. R. Haught

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser University
KeywordsSiltAcoustic Doppler current profilerSedimentCalibrationBackscatter (email)Sediment transportEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Flux (metallurgy)GeologySoil scienceGrain sizeRemote sensingCurrent (fluid)OceanographyGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A horizontally mounted 300 kHz acoustic Doppler current profiler was deployed in Fraser River at Mission, British Columbia, to test its capability to detect size‐classified concentration of suspended sediment. Bottle samples in‐beam provide a direct calibration of the hADCP signals. We also deployed a 600 kHz vertically mounted ADCP from a boat in combination with bottle samples. Fraser River at Mission is 525 m wide with moderate suspended sediment concentration (up to 350 mg L −1 in our measurements, mostly silt), and a modest sand load only at high flows. We use an entirely empirical approach to calculate the sediment load using ADCPs to test the reliability of acoustic methods when assumptions embedded in the sonar equation about the relation between suspended sediment size and concentration, and acoustic signals are violated. vADCP calibration using matched individual bottle samples and acoustic backscatter departed from the expected theoretical relation. Calibration using depth‐averaged sediment concentration and acoustic backscatter more closely matched theoretical expectations, but varied through the season. hADCP calibrations conformed with theoretical expectations and did not exhibit seasonal variation. Silt and sand were successfully discriminated; however, silt dominates the correlations. We found no coherent relation between acoustic attenuation and silt concentration. In‐beam results are extended by correlation to estimate mean sediment concentration and total suspended flux in the entire channel: this auxiliary correlation cancels any calibration bias and permits monitoring of size‐classified suspended sediment in absence of detailed information of sediment grain‐size distribution.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations53
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207