MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EROSION MITIGATION DESIGN IN THE ARCTIC CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS

2023· article· en· W4386960289 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCoastal Engineering Proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsInuvialuit Regional CorporationBGC Engineering (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevetmentShoreCoastal erosionFlooding (psychology)PeninsulaErosionGeologyHarbourStorm surgeHAMLET (protein complex)StormOceanographyGeographyArchaeologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk is a low-lying peninsula in the Arctic on the Beaufort Sea that is vulnerable to coastal erosion and intermittent flooding. Most residences and buildings located near the coast have been relocated; those remaining are currently at risk of damage or destruction during storm events. In the longer term, cultural sites such as the graveyard are also at risk. Nearby Tuktoyaktuk Island, a beach/bluff system which shelters Tuktoyaktuk Harbour from waves, is eroding and if not protected may be gone by 2050. Baird was retained by the Hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk and Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC) to assess erosion mitigation alternatives and select/implement a preferred design to protect the Hamlet and Island, which comprise a total shoreline length of approximately 2 km. Baird developed three design alternatives for shoreline protection, including articulated concrete block mattress (ACBM), concrete slab, and quarried armour stone revetments. The selected design is comprised of a quarried armour stone revetment along the entirety of the exposed shoreline of Tuktoyaktuk Island and the majority of the Tuktoyaktuk Hamlet shoreline.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.197 · 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