MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755155832 · doi:10.2166/hydro.2017.149

Scour depth model for grade-control structures

2017· article· en· W2755155832 on OpenAlex

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 Hydroinformatics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniwersytet Rolniczy im. Hugona Kołłątaja w Krakowie
KeywordsGene expression programmingWeirDownstream (manufacturing)Parametric statisticsHydrology (agriculture)STREAMSFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringGeologyComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsGeographyStatisticsArtificial intelligenceCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Grade-control structures (GCS) are commonly used to protect fish habitat by preventing excessive river-bed degradation in mountain streams. However, flow over the GCS can cause localized scour immediately downstream of the weir. This paper aims to develop more accurate models for prediction of the maximum scour depth downstream of GCS, using a more extensive dataset and evolutionary gene expression programming (GEP). Three GEP models are developed relating maximum scour depth and various control variables. The developed models had the lowest error compared to available models. A parametric analysis is performed for further verification of the developed GEP model. The results indicate that the proposed relations are simple and can more accurately predict the scour depth downstream GCS.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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