Temporal patterns in the normal-regime fine-sediment cascade in Russell Creek Basin, Vancouver Island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large, infrequent "episodic" sediment transfers are commonly considered differently from "normal-regime" sediment-transfer activity. For example, in the important hillslope-gully-stream sediment cascade pathway in coastal British Columbia, debris slides and debris torrents are considered as "episodic events". On the other hand, lower-magnitude hillslope to gully-channel sediment transfers and fluvial sediment tranSport within gully and stream channels are usually considered as "normal-regime" activity, represented by annual yields. However, the results of this study illustrate the highly episodic nature of normal-regime fine-sediment transfers, which are closely linked to hydrometeorological and sediment-supply conditions. The results indicate that qualitative modelling of fine-sediment transfer activity, at the synoptic or event scale, should be possible based upon hydrometeorological and sediment-supply information. From such a model ~ the elements of which are presented in the concluding chapter ~ fine-sediment transfer activity could be forecast based upon regional weather forecasts. The study was conducted in Russell Creek Basin, on northern Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Fine-sediment transfer activity was monitored at a nested hierarchy of sites representing fine-sediment transfers from unstable hillslopes to a gully channel, suspended sediment transport out of the unstable gully and a nearby stable gully, and suspended sediment transport in Russell Creek near the mouth. Russell Creek Basin is located within Tsitika Watershed, which is the site of a British Columbia Ministry of Forests study dedicated to determining relative fine-sediment contributions from natural and logging-related sediment sources. The results of the Russell Creek study indicate that an event-based sediment sampling program is desirable and that at least some automated sampling is required. Furthermore, development of a qualitative sediment-transfer activity forecast model would be useful in interpretation of sample data and would allow efforts to be concentrated during the periods of greatest sediment-transfer activity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".