MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing Erosion Hazards due to Floods on Fans: Physical Modeling and Application to Engineering Challenges

2017· article· en· W2598998093 on OpenAlex
Brett Eaton, Lucy MacKenzie, Matthias Jakob, Hamish Weatherly

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsBGC Engineering (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSetbackChannel (broadcasting)Hydrology (agriculture)Flood mythGeologyFlow (mathematics)Bank erosionErosionDebris flowEnvironmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringDebrisEngineeringGeomorphologyCivil engineeringGeographyMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments using a 1∶30 scale physical model show that channel degradation on alluvial fans is dominated by lateral channel migration rather than vertical incision. The results are used to estimate the exposure probability during single flood events with peak flows up to twice the formative flow, considering both the burial depth beneath the channel bed and the setback from the channel banks. For the largest flows modeled, the exposure probability fell below the detection limits for this analysis when the burial depth was greater than approximtely 3.6 times the mean flow depth, and the lateral setback distance was greater than approxinately 0.9 times the mean flow width for the formative flow. The minimum depth-of-cover criterion accounts for the worst-case occurrence of net bed degradation during a single flood event, but does not consider the vertical degradation that could occur in channels because of knickpoint development and migration, or in channels with engineered banks that prevent channel width adjustments; they also do not consider the potential effects of debris flows. These hazards are driven by different processes and require different analyses to evaluate the potential exposure risk. Because the experiments evaluated the effects of single flood events, the results do not account for shifting channel position over time, and they are intended to guide monitoring of channel behavior for existing infrastructure. The results also can be used to guide infrastructure design, but in this case the design will need to consider the cumulative effect of channel migration and avulsion over the design life span of the infrastructure.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.244 · 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