Comparing the behaviour of spherical beads and natural grains in bedload mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract It is common to use idealised materials to study the dynamics of granular transport in fluid flows, but the impact of this choice upon sediment behaviour has not been extensively explored. To tackle this research gap, two experiments were undertaken to explore the influence of a finer grain input to a channelized coarser granular flow driven by a shallow fluid flow. The first set of runs was undertaken using spherical glass beads, and the second set with natural fluvial sediment. The transport system approximates a narrow slice through the bedload at the bottom of a river. In the runs with natural grains, the infiltration of fine sediment into the bed was similar to the spherical glass beads, but with reduced infiltration capacity. We ascribe this behaviour to irregular and variable pore shapes and sizes in the natural material. The behaviour of the bedload in the natural material runs matched that of the bead runs only when the feed contained a high content of fines. When the feed contained a low content of fines the transport of natural grains was more complex, including the emergence of migrating collections of grains. However, the overall changes in bed and water slope due to the finer grain input were comparable in both sets of experiments. We conclude that artificial, idealised materials qualitatively represent sedimentary phenomena, but that quantitative differences in the outcomes must be expected. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".