MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2900729658 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2018-0131

A laboratory method for the visualization and quantification of hyporheic flow paths and velocities

2018· article· en· W2900729658 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christopher Fruetel, Kevin G. Mumford, Ana Maria Ferreira da Silva, Alexander Rey, Kerri S. Bascom

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlumeHyporheic zoneFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Flow conditionsGeologySubsurface flowBedformGroundwaterSoil scienceGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsGeomorphologySediment transportSediment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hyporheic flow, the flow of water through the permeable material immediately surrounding a river, is important for nutrient cycling, dissolved oxygen transport, and contaminant transport. In addition, there is recent concern regarding the role of hyporheic flow on the contamination of rivers following oil spills. To better understand hyporheic flow paths and velocities, it is important to measure hyporheic flow at high spatial and temporal resolution. A practical method to measure hyporheic flow in a laboratory flume based on dye injection, digital images, and moment analysis was developed. An experiment conducted using a single gravel bar demonstrated good agreement between observations and estimates based on image processing. The measured hyporheic flow field showed upstream and downstream flow that discharged downstream of the bar top, the presence of a flow divide and flow stagnation, and hyporheic flow velocities indicative of turbulent flow for which Darcy’s law is not applicable.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics→French-language works237,207→