Flow patterns and critical criteria of thermally stratified shear flow in braided rivers
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flow characteristics of thermally stratified shear flow in braided rivers are particularly complicated and poorly understood. In this study, a series of typical flow patterns was examined and their critical criteria were determined. Four flow patterns were identified: mixed, locally unstable, continuously stratified, and two-layer flow. Temperature distributions of the four types of flow patterns were analyzed and compared. The critical Froude numbers for unstable flow, F Dcr1 , and stable flow, F Dcr2 , were determined to be 6 and 1, respectively, and comparison of F Dcr1 and F Dcr2 to the peak Froude numbers , F D1 at the outer bank and F D2 at the inner bank along the anabranch, allowed the flow patterns to be assessed. Then, a discriminant based on initial Jeffreys-Keulegan stability parameters was established to distinguish the flow stages from two-layer flow to completely mixed flow . It is indicated that the three critical Jeffreys-Keulegan parameters increased with the diversion angle of braided rivers. Results also show that, compared to the stratified flow in straight and curved channels, it was more difficult for braided stratified flow to maintain as two-layer flow, and it more easily became mixed flow. Consequently, empirical expressions for stability criteria of the thermally stratified shear flow in braided rivers are presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it