MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923306767 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0689

Experimental and numerical studies for estimating coefficient of discharge of side compound weir

2019· article· en· W2923306767 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mujib Ahmad Ansari, Ajmal Hussain, Ali Shariq, Fakre Alam

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeirFroude numberDischarge coefficientHydraulicsRegression analysisOpen-channel flowFlow (mathematics)Sensitivity (control systems)RegressionMathematicsStatisticsMechanicsHydrology (agriculture)EngineeringGeometryGeotechnical engineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sharp-crested side compound weir is a flow diversion structure provided on one or both side walls of a channel to divert water from the main channel. Compound sharp-crested weirs are widely used in irrigation, hydraulics, and environmental engineering. This article presents results of experimental and numerical studies conducted on sharp-crested side compound weirs in open channels. Owing to the complex mechanism of flow through a side compound weir it is difficult to establish a regression model to accurately predict the coefficient of discharge (Cd). In this study, an alternative approach to the conventional regression modelling in the form of artificial neural network (ANN) has been used to predict the values of Cd. A network architecture with trained values of connection weights and biases is recommended to predict Cd. The input to ANN model consists of grouped parameters pertaining to the ratio of weighted crest height to the length of the side compound weir ([Formula: see text]), the ratio of upstream depth to length of the side compound weir (Y1/L), and upstream Froude number (F1). The results of the ANN model applied herein were found to be superior to those obtained through regression modelling by previous researchers. The sensitivity analysis of the ANN model shows that [Formula: see text] is the most important parameter for the estimation of Cd; followed by Y1/L and F1.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicHydraulic flow and structuresFrench-language works237,207