MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296709695 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2021-0596

Modelling the transport of tailings after Mount Polley tailings dam failure using multisource geospatial data

2022· article· en· W4296709695 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Uthra Sreekumar, Colin D. Rennie, Abdolmajid Mohammadian, Ioan Nistor, Julie Lovitt, Ying Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTailings Management and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTailingsRheologyGeologyGeotechnical engineeringCalibrationDigital elevation modelOutflowSurface finishViscositySedimentSediment transportSoil scienceEnvironmental scienceGeomorphologyMaterials scienceRemote sensingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tailings dams (TD) are usually located in valleys that are not easily accessible and hence one global digital elevation model (DEM) is used in most of the TD breach outflow modelling studies but the challenges this impose when calibrating visco-plastic rheological models has not been fully investigated. Implications of using GeoBase DEMs for model calibration is studied by comparing it with a model that is calibrated using a merged DEM generated from multiple products. The influence of rheological parameters, roughness coefficient and sediment concentration ( C v ) on simulated variables is studied. It was concluded that when GeoBase DEM was used for back analysis of the event, physically meaningful set of rheology values could not be assigned. Flow behaviour was strongly influenced by C v and least influenced by Manning’s values. Runout distance was more sensitive to viscosity than yield stress. Mudflow depth and arrival time increased with increase in viscosity and C v .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicTailings Management and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207