MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033149730 · doi:10.4324/9780429297977-11

Variability of rainwash erosion within small sample areas

2020· book-chapter· en· W3033149730 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shiu‐hung Luk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErosionSample (material)GeographyGeologyEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyGeomorphologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter reports and synthesizes results obtained from several laboratory and field projects that were completed recently. Rainwash (material entrained by direct drag forces, plus material entrained by splash and transported by wash) pertaining to an alpine podzolic soil from the Canadian Rockies was found to range from 5.62 to 10.78 g m -2 min -1 with a coefficient of variation of 18.4%. Minor design modifications were incorporated to improve the separation of materials transported by rainwash and splash-saltation. In the case of Pontypool, the increased variability in runoff had little effect on rainwash because entrainment by splash-saltation was dominant. Where the dominance of splash-saltation in causing entrainment was partially eclipsed by turbulence in the raindrop-disturbed flow as in the case of Lockport, some increases in rainwash variability were observed. Moreover, the lower rainwash-runoff relationship in these soils implies that splash-saltation was dominant over flow turbulence in the entrainment of surface particles or aggregates.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207