MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588708990 · doi:10.1080/07011784.2016.1249961

Morphodynamics of diversion channels in Northern Manitoba, Canada

2017· article· en· W2588708990 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Navid Kimiaghalam, Shawn P. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaManitoba Hydro
KeywordsBeach morphodynamicsGeologyGeographyOceanographySediment transportGeomorphologySediment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2-Mile and 8-Mile diversion channels in Northern Manitoba help to maintain the efficiency of Manitoba Hydro’s hydroelectric generating stations located downstream on the lower Nelson River and also assist with flooding control on Lake Winnipeg. Erosion within the channels has been consistently monitored for several decades to better understand these processes to ensure the future performance of the channels. Morphodynamic studies in these channels are complicated due to the high variability of the bed and bank material, the effect of severe cold weather on the erodibility of the channel banks, and the effect of the surrounding lakes on the hydrodynamic conditions of these channels. The present study includes field measurements, experimental testing, and hydrodynamic and thermal numerical modelling to quantify morphological changes within the channels. Moreover, 30 years of monitoring data were analyzed to validate the results of the study. Simple graphs were presented to estimate average applied shear stress over the channel banks and beds based on results of the calibrated and validated hydrodynamic models. Moreover, the effects of wave action on the total applied shear stress were investigated within the 2-Mile Channel under different flow conditions. Comparison between historical cross-sectional survey and results of the numerical models and experiments showed that subaerial processes, mostly freeze–thaw, could be a major eroding factor.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.174
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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207