Ice cascade growth and decay: a thermodynamic approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ice volume evolution of a frozen waterfall (or ice cascade) was studied using a thermodynamic model. The model was developed from meteorological data collected in the vicinity of the waterfall and validated from ice volume measurements estimated from terrestrial lidar images. The ice cascade forms over a 45 m high rock wall located in northern Gaspésie, Québec, Canada. Two stages of formation were identified. During the first stage, the growth is mainly controlled by air convection around the flowing and free-falling water. The ice cascade growth rate increases with decreasing air temperature below 0°C and when the water flow reaches its lowest level. During the second stage, the ice cascade covers the entire rock-wall surface, water flow is isolated from the outside environment and ice volume increases asymptotically. Heat is evacuated from the water flow through the ice cover by conduction. The growth is controlled mainly by the conductive heat loss through the ice cover but also by the longwave radiation emitted at the ice surface during the night. In spring, melting of the ice cascade is dependent on the air convection over the ice surface but also on the sensible heat carried by the increasing water flow and the solar radiation received during the day.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".