MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213255831 · doi:10.1029/2021gl096088

The Impact of Intermittency on Bed Load Sediment Transport

2022· article· en· W4213255831 on OpenAlexaff
Santiago Benavides, Eric Deal, Matthew Rushlow, Jeremy G. Venditti, Qiong Zhang, Ken Kamrin, J. Taylor Perron

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAeolian processes and effects
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersArmy Research LaboratoryNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIntermittencySediment transportEntrainment (biomusicology)SedimentBed loadGeologyEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceMechanicsGeotechnical engineeringTurbulenceGeomorphologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sediment transport by wind or water near the threshold of grain motion is dominated by rare transport events. This intermittency makes it difficult to calibrate sediment transport laws, or to define an unambiguous threshold for grain entrainment, both of which are crucial for predicting sediment transport rates. We present a model that captures this intermittency and shows that the noisy statistics of sediment transport contain useful information about the sediment entrainment threshold and the variations in driving fluid stress. Using a combination of laboratory experiments and analytical results, we measure the threshold for grain entrainment in a novel way and introduce a new property, the “shear stress variability”, which predicts conditions under which transport will be intermittent. Our work suggests strategies for improving measurements and predictions of sediment flux and hints that the sediment transport law may change close to the threshold of motion.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicAeolian processes and effectsFrench-language works237,207