MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561445421 · doi:10.1002/2016jc012177

Tsunamis generated by long and thin granular landslides in a large flume

2016· article· en· W2561445421 on OpenAlexaff
G. Miller, W. Andy Take, Ryan P. Mulligan, Scott McDougall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)University of British ColumbiaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideGeologyFlumeWave flumeAmplitudeGeotechnical engineeringSubmarine landslideWave heightFlow (mathematics)GeomorphologyMechanicsSeismologyBreaking waveWave propagationPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this experimental study, granular material is released down slope to investigate landslide‐generated waves. Starting with a known volume and initial position of the landslide source, detailed data are obtained on the velocity and thickness of the granular flow, the shape and location of the submarine landslide deposit, the amplitude and shape of the near‐field wave, the far‐field wave evolution, and the wave runup elevation on a smooth impermeable slope. The experiments are performed on a 6.7 m long 30° slope on which gravity accelerates the landslides into a 2.1 m wide and 33.0 m long wave flume that terminates with a 27° runup ramp. For a fixed landslide volume of 0.34 m 3 , tests are conducted in a range of still water depths from 0.05 to 0.50 m. Observations from high‐speed cameras and measurements from wave probes indicate that the granular landslide moves as a long and thin train of material, and that only a portion of the landslide (termed the “effective mass”) is engaged in activating the leading wave. The wave behavior is highly dependent on the water depth relative to the size of the landslide. In deeper water, the near‐field wave behaves as a stable solitary‐like wave, while in shallower water, the wave behaves as a breaking dissipative bore. Overall, the physical model observations are in good agreement with the results of existing empirical equations when the effective mass is used to predict the maximum near‐field wave amplitude, the far‐field amplitude, and the runup of tsunamis generated by granular landslides.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

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

Citations88
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207