MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889982270 · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/20184005037

Mixing processes at an ice-covered river confluence

2018· article· en· W2889982270 on OpenAlexaff
Pascale M. Biron, Thomas Buffin‐Bélanger, Nancy Martel

Bibliographic record

VenueE3S Web of Conferences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfluenceGeologyMixing (physics)VortexTurbulenceFlow (mathematics)GeomorphologyMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

River confluences are characterized by a complex mixing zone with three-dimensional turbulent structures, which can be affected by the presence of an ice cover during the winter. The objective of this study is to characterize the flow structure in the mixing zone at a medium-size (~ 40 m) river confluence with and without an ice cover. Detailed velocity profiles were collected under the ice along the mixing plane with an Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter. For the ice-free conditions, drone imagery was used to characterize the mixing layer structures for various flow stages. Results indicate that during the ice-free conditions, very large Kelvin-Helmholtz (KH) coherent structures are visible due to turbidity differences, and occupy up to 50% of the width of the parent channel. During winter, the ice cover affects velocity profiles by moving the highest velocities towards the center of the profiles. Large turbulent structures are visible in both the streamwise and lateral velocity components. The strong correlation between these velocity components indicates that KH vortices are the dominating coherent structures in the mixing zone. A spatio-temporal conceptual model is presented to illustrate the main differences on the three-dimensional flow structure at the river confluence with and without the ice cover.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE3S Web of ConferencesSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207