MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802387495 · doi:10.1111/sed.12488

How turbidity current frequency and character varies down a fjord‐delta system: Combining direct monitoring, deposits and seismic data

2018· article· en· W2802387495 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Cooper Stacey, Philip R. Hill, Peter J. Talling, Randolph J. Enkin, John E. Clark, Gwyn Lintern

Bibliographic record

VenueSedimentology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Environment Research CouncilUniversity of SouthamptonSight Research UKSimon Fraser UniversityTransport CanadaRoyal Roads University
KeywordsGeologyTurbidity currentChannelizedTurbiditeBedformSubmarine pipelineCurrent (fluid)DeltaGeomorphologySubmarine landslideChannel (broadcasting)SubmarineSedimentRipple marksLandslideOceanographyStructural basinSediment transportSedimentary depositional environment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Submarine turbidity currents are one of the most important processes for moving sediment across our planet; they are hazardous to offshore infrastructure, deposit petroleum reservoirs worldwide, and may record tsunamigenic landslides. However, there are few studies that have monitored these submarine flows in action, and even fewer studies that have combined direct monitoring with longer‐term records from core and seismic data of deposits. This article provides one of the most complete studies yet of a turbidity current system. The aim here is to understand what controls changes in flow frequency and character along the turbidite system. The study area is a 12 km long delta‐fed fjord (Howe Sound) in British Columbia, Canada. Over 100 often powerful (up to 2 to 3 m sec −1 ) events occur each year in the highly‐active proximal channels, which extend for 1 to 2 km from the delta lip. About half of these events reach the lobes at the channel mouths. However, flow frequency decreases rapidly once these initially sand‐rich flows become unconfined, and only one to five flows run out across the mid‐slope each year. Many of these sand‐rich, channelized, delta‐sourced flows therefore dissipated over a few hundred metres, once unconfined, rather than eroding and igniting. Upflow migrating bedforms indicate that supercritical flow dominated in the proximal channels and lobes, and also across the unconfined mid‐slope. These supercritical flows deposited thick sand beds in proximal channels and lobes, but thinner and finer beds on the unconfined mid‐slope. The distal flat basin records far larger volume and more hazardous events that have a recurrence interval of ca 100 years. This study shows how sand‐rich delta‐fed flows dissipate rapidly once they become unconfined, that supercritical flows dominate in both confined and unconfined settings, and how a second type of more hazardous, and much less frequent event is linked to a different scale of margin failure.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.255
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 teacher head, 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

Citations50
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSedimentologySame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207