MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392375134 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.140123

Modeling Optimal Locations of Breakwaters to Mitigate Wind-Induced Waves in Bahar Al-Najaf Depression Using MIKE21

2024· article· en· W4392375134 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Uday Abdul Sahib M. Alturfi, Abdul-Hassan K. Shukur

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreakwaterDepression (economics)Environmental scienceMeteorologyComputer scienceMarine engineeringGeologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The waves produced by the wind are the most noticeable and frequently the most significant waves in the range of waves at sea.Given the limited amount of knowledge on the mathematical modelling of the wind induced wave in lake or shallow water depth, considered to this point.In this paper, a briefly look at how these waves are formed by the wind in the Bahar Al-Najaf depression, as well as some of the essential properties that arise.A numerical model based on unstructured mesh is proposed to predicate and visualize wave conditions.MIKE21 spectral model base on mass balance equation was used as a numerical tool to find the optimal location of mitigation structures to dissipation the wave energy near the neighbor structures.The amount of variation between the simulated wave heights and those calculated using an empirical equation is less than 9%.Three schemes for breakwater has been tested to find the optimal location and orientation of breakwater.The results showed that the three schemes used for the breakwater gave varying results, both depending on its location and characteristics.The first scheme gave a covering area approaching 1.19 km 2 , and the second scheme gave approximately 0.889 km, and third scheme gave a covering area 1.11 km 2 .This study showed that the wave heights at the upstream and downstream were measured after the breakwater had been constructed, and they were found to be between 0.35 and 0.7 m.This implies a decrease of around 40% to 60% in comparison to the original heights of 1.25 to 0.9 m.All of these schemes are good to a certain extent in dispersing the energy by breaking the single pattern of the wave at rates that may reach 50% of the height of the arriving wave, the first scenario was the best and most efficient in terms of energy dispersion.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207