Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sediment supply is widely believed to be a key control on alluvial fan morphology and channel dynamics. Although the sediment supply to natural fans is rather episodic, experimental studies of alluvial fans often use constant sediment supply rates, making it difficult to relate fan dynamics to the magnitude and frequency of sediment supply in the field. This paper presents a series of experiments designed to test the impact of episodic sediment supply on fan evolution and dynamics. We compare four experiments, each with the same mean sediment supply but different durations of high- and low-supply periods. The experiments show that fan morphology and channel dynamics respond systematically to the temporal elongation of sediment supply oscillations: longer supply cycles generate flatter fans with more trenched channels. These results highlight how different basin conditions might generate different fan morphologies: supply limited basins with intermittent sediment supply might generate fans that are flatter than expected. Our results raise the question of whether a constant sediment supply in experimental models can adequately characterise the dynamics of natural fans in the field.
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 | 0.005 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.041 | 0.035 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.036 |
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".