MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394404613 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.4737889

Tsunamis generated by fast granular landslides: 3D experiments and empirical predictors

2017· dataset· en· W4394404613 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francesco Bregoli, Allen Bateman, Vicente Medina

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2017
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideGeologyEmpirical researchSeismologyGeographyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Landslides falling into water bodies can generate impulsive waves, which are a type of tsunamis. The propagating wave may be highly destructive for hydraulic structures, civil infrastructure and people living along the shorelines. A facility to study this phenomenon was set up in the laboratory of the Technical University of Catalonia. The set-up consists of a new device releasing granular material at high velocity into a wave basin. A system employing laser sheets, high-speed and high-definition cameras was designed to accurately measure the high velocity and geometry of the sliding mass as well as the produced water displacement in time and space. The analysis of experimental data helped to develop empirical relationships linking the landslide parameters with the produced wave amplitude, propagation features and energy, which are useful tools for the hazard assessment. The empirical relationships were successfully tested in the case of the 2007 event that occurred in Chehalis Lake (Canada).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→