MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965887274 · doi:10.3390/jmse7080251

Experimental Study on Extreme Hydrodynamic Loading on Pipelines. Part 1: Flow Hydrodynamics

2019· article· en· W2965887274 on OpenAlexafffund
Behnaz Ghodoosipour, Jacob Stolle, Ioan Nistor, Abdolmajid Mohammadian, Nils Goseberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEarthquake and Tsunami Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsPipeline transportFlood mythFlooding (psychology)Environmental scienceFlow (mathematics)Coastal floodFlow conditionsForcing (mathematics)Hydrology (agriculture)Geotechnical engineeringGeologyOceanographyMechanicsSea level riseEnvironmental engineeringClimate changeGeographyAtmospheric sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past two decades, extreme flood events generated by tsunamis or hurricanes have caused massive damage to nearshore infrastructures and coastal communities. Utility pipelines are part of such infrastructure and need to be protected against potential extreme hydrodynamic loading. Therefore, to address the uncertainties and parameters involved in extreme hydrodynamic loading on pipelines, a comprehensive experimental program was performed using an experimental facility which is capable of generating significant hydraulic forcing, such as dam-break waves. The study presented herein examines the dam-break flow characteristics and influence of the presence of pipelines on flow conditions. To simulate conditions of coastal flooding under tsunami-induced inundation, experiments were performed on both dry and wet bed conditions to assess the influence of different impoundment depths and still water levels on the hydrodynamic features.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Marine Science and EngineeringSame topicEarthquake and Tsunami EffectsFrench-language works237,207