The importance of inter-flood periods on alluvial fan morphology, hazards and reworking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On steep alluvial fans, debris floods happen rarely but are often catastrophic. Debris floods and their associated hazards are well documented, but the time between flood events has generally been considered a period of ‘dormancy’, and thus ignored. Here, we present results from a series of four alluvial fan experiments in which we examine the inter-flood period processes and their influence at both event and fan evolution timescales. We built each fan from the same number of debris floods, and the same volume of sediment, but varied the duration of the inter-flood period. This duration had a fundamental influence on fan morphology: in particular fan slope and fan area varied between the experiments. In addition, longer inter-flood periods led to increased flow channelization and channel incision near the fan apex. Our findings challenge the notion that inter-flood periods on steep alluvial fans may be considered dormant. Moreover, the results suggest that longer inter-flood periods may act to contain subsequent debris flood events, shift the locus of debris flood hazard, and reduce their severity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".