MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Numerical Modeling of Tsunami-Induced Scouring around a Square Column: Performance Assessment of FLOW-3D and Delft3D

2020· article· en· W3040878964 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philippe April Le Quéré, Ioan Nistor, Abdolmajid Mohammadian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Coastal Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEarthquake and Tsunami Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSquare (algebra)FlumeFlow (mathematics)Water columnGeologyNumerical modelingNumerical modelsComputer simulationBreakwaterTurbulenceGeotechnical engineeringHydrostatic equilibriumHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceOceanographyGeographyEngineeringMechanicsMeteorologySimulationGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

April Le Quéré, P.; Nistor, I., and Mohammadian, A., 2020. Numerical modeling of tsunami-induced scouring around a square column: Performance assessment of FLOW-3D and Delft3D. Journal of Coastal Research, 36(6), 1278–1291. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.In recent years, tsunamis have caused considerable damage to coastal infrastructures and inflicted numerous casualties in coastal communities in the impacted regions. The information, which the design requirements for tsunami-resistant infrastructures is based on, is still in its preliminary stages. The focus of the study was to investigate, by means of a numerical model, the scouring occurring around a single, square column subjected to tsunami floods. A three-dimensional (3D) hydrostatic numerical model (Delft3D) and a 3D nonhydrostatic model (FLOW-3D) were used to replicate a series of physical tests conducted at the University of Ottawa, which consisted of a dam-break wave impacting onto a single square column installed over a movable sediment bed. These experimental tests were conducted in the Dambreak Flume at the University of Ottawa. Four different turbulence models and two different sediment-transport models were tested to find the most appropriate combination, which could model the complex flow characteristics associated with a dam-break–type bore. An extensive review of the hydrodynamic and scouring performance of various numerical models was also included in this study.

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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Coastal ResearchSame topicEarthquake and Tsunami EffectsFrench-language works237,207