Experimental Study on the Influence of an Artificial Reef on Cross-Shore Morphodynamic Processes of a Wave-Dominated Beach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial reefs are being implemented around the world for their multi-functions including coastal protection and environmental improvement. To better understand the hydrodynamic and morphodynamic roles of an artificial reef (AR) in beach protection, a series of experiments were conducted in a 50 m-long wave flume configured with a 1:10 sloping beach and a model AR (1.8 m long × 0.3 m high) with 0.2 m submergence depth. Five regular and five irregular wave conditions were generated on two types of beach profiles (with/without model AR) to study the cross-shore hydrodynamic and morphological evolution process. The influences of AR on the processes are concluded as follows: (1) AR significantly decreases the incident wave energy, and its dissipation effect differs for higher and lower harmonics under irregular wave climates; (2) AR changes the cross-shore patterns of hydrodynamic factors (significant wave height, wave skewness and asymmetry, and undertow), leading to the movement of shoaling and breaking zones; (3) the beach evolution is characterized by a sandbar and a scarp which respectively sit at a higher and lower location on the profile with AR than natural beach without AR; (4) the cross-shore morphological features indicate that AR can lead to beach state transformation toward reflective state; (5) the scarp retreat process can be described by a model where the scarp location depends linearly on the natural exponential of time with the fitting parameters determined by wave run-up reduced by AR. This study demonstrates cross-shore effects of AR as a beach protection structure that changes wave dynamics in surf and swash zone, reduces offshore sediment transport, and induces different morphological features.
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".