MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320064268 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2014-0070

Measurement and numerical modeling studies of the highest bottom shear stress in the Randle Reef area

2014· article· en· W2320064268 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Cheng He, Eric Scott, M. J. Graham, Andrew Binns

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShear stressGeologyFlow (mathematics)Acoustic Doppler current profilerWind speedFlow velocitySedimentShear velocityMarine engineeringGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceMeteorologyCurrent (fluid)MechanicsTurbulenceEngineeringOceanographyGeomorphologyGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the highest bottom shear stress, induced by wind in an area of Hamilton Harbour, Ontario, Canada known as Randle Reef. The study was conducted in support of a component of a contaminated sediment remediation plan utilizing a thin layer of sand to manage contaminated sediments. Toward this end, four acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs) were deployed at two locations in the study region to measure velocity profiles for the purpose of indirectly measuring bottom shear stress (BSS) and model verification. There is no easy way to directly measure BSS in the field. As a result, the use of the logarithmic-profile method from the ADCP measured high resolution velocity profiles in the bottom layer was explored. This approach, according to our best knowledge, has not been published for a wind driven flow in a small open water body. To use the indirectly measured BSS to estimate the highest BSS in the study area, a three-dimensional hydrodynamic model was adopted to provide the spatial and temporal information of the bottom flow. The results showed that the modeled and measured flow velocity components agreed reasonably well at most of the water depths with the correlation coefficients being greater than 0.6. However, agreements between the modeled and measured bottom flow speeds were worse than expected due to the error contributions from both the modeled velocity components. Therefore, the modeled flow speed required rescaling based on ADCP velocity measurements before it could be deemed reliable. This is especially important in estimation of the BSS with a quadratic formula because the calculated BSS is proportional to the square of the speed.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207