Marine erosion of the Point Grey cliffs: A nearshore hydrodynamic, sediment transport and budget study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the edge of Vancouver and the Strait of Georgia the Point Grey cliffs experience marine and subaerial erosion. The retreat of the cliffs will eventually result in losing university assets, infrastructure and archaeological treasures. Wave-induced sediment transports are supposed to be the main marine erosion mechanism. This report presents other potential marine erosion mechanisms (e.g. direct wave attack, sediment budget deficits, sea-level rise and increased storm intensity) over different time scales and studies the sediment transport and budgets in more detail. The study is performed with the help of a numerical hydrodynamic model with representative scenarios of the hydrodynamic conditions. The model and scenarios are set-up by means of a site visit, literature, water level records, wind and wave records and sediment samples. The resulting scenarios and results provide an hydrodynamical overview of flow- and wave conditions. Subsequently, the sediment transports, indeed, seem to be initiated by waves. Results also opened up a new potential sediment transport path not yet mentioned by sources. However, the sediment transports does not seem to be the only erosion mechanism. A potential human-induced sediment budget deficit is likely as well. Additionally the direct wave attack and the combined sea-level rise and intensified storms are also either present or becoming more relevant in the future. The contents of this report forms a basis for developing design criteria for a coastal solution to the marine erosion of the Point Grey cliffs. An engineered beach, together with a foreshore nourishment, out of locally dredged material seems like the most logical option. By further improving the numerical model and the overall study with presented recommendations, this study can inspire further design steps for a solution to save the Point Grey cliffs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".