EROSION MITIGATION DESIGN IN THE ARCTIC CONSIDERING CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".