MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3003608100 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0658

Numerical investigation on the effect of bluntness factor on scouring mechanism by using lenticular geometry piers

2020· article· en· W3003608100 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yousef Hassanzadeh, Milad Khosravi, Nazila Kardan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPierGeometryFlow (mathematics)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringShape factorMechanicsEngineeringStructural engineeringPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local scour and flow field around cylinders with lenticular geometry and different bluntness factors under the clear-water state were investigated numerically. To examine the scouring, large eddy simulation with a WMLES-Omega sub-grid model incorporating the sediment transport and morphodynamic model was applied. Streamlined geometry of the pier significantly affected the scour pattern and flow field in the lenticular model with length to width ratio of 5 and bluntness factor of zero. In the mentioned case, a very small scoured region was estimated at the sides of the pier, so it can be concluded that scour depth and scoured region decreases as the length to width ratio increases. Investigation of the scouring process and the flow field revealed that, the flow separation can affect the scour mechanism more in comparison to down-flow.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes→French-language works237,207→