MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770979302 · doi:10.3390/geosciences7040121

Overtopping of Coastal Structures by Tsunami Waves

2017· article· en· W2770979302 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Esteban, Toni Glasbergen, Tomoyuki Takabatake, Bas Hofland, Shinsaku Nishizaki, Yuta Nishida, Jacob Stolle, Ioan Nistor, Jeremy D. Bricker, Hiroshi Takagi, Tomoya Shibayama

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEarthquake and Tsunami Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersTechnische Universiteit DelftWaseda UniversityMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsTsunami waveGeologySeismologyHuman settlementGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami, Japanese tsunami protection guidelines stipulate that coastal defences should ensure that settlements are shielded from the coastal inundation that would result from Level 1 tsunami events (with return periods in the order of about 100 years). However, the overtopping mechanism and leeward inundation heights of tsunami bores as they hit coastal structures has received little attention in the past. To ascertain this phenomenon, the authors conducted physical experiments using a dam-break mechanism, which could generate bores that overtopped different types of structures. The results indicate that it is necessary to move away from only considering the tsunami inundation height at the beach, and also consider the bore velocity as it approaches the onshore area. The authors also prepared a simple, conservative method of estimating the inundation height after a structure of a given height, provided that the incident bore velocity and height are known.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations37
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeosciencesSame topicEarthquake and Tsunami EffectsFrench-language works237,207