Landslide Deposit Erosion and Reworking Documented by Geomatic Surveys at Mount Meager, BC, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mount Meager is a deeply eroded quaternary volcanic complex located in southwestern British Columbia (BC) and is known for its frequent large landslides. In 2010, the south face of Mount Meager collapsed, generating a long-runout debris avalanche that was one of the largest landslides (50 × 106 m3) in Canadian history. Over the past 14 years, the landslide deposit has been reworked by stream action, delivering large amounts of sediment to Lillooet River, just downstream. In this study, we investigate 10 years of geomorphic evolution of the landslide deposit using orthophotos and digital elevation models (DEMs) generated using Structure from Motion (SfM) photogrammetry on aerial photographs acquired during unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) surveys. The SfM products were used to produce a series of precise maps that highlight the geomorphological changes along the lower Meager Creek within the runout area of the landslide. Comparison of DEMs produced from 2010, 2012, 2015, and 2019 imagery allowed us to calculate deposit volume changes related to erosion, transport, and redeposition of landslide material. We estimate that about 1.1 × 106 m3 of sediment was eroded from the landslide deposit over the period 2015–2019. About 5.2 × 105 m3 of that sediment was redeposited inside the study area. About 5.8 × 105 m3 of sediment, mainly sand, silt, and clay, were exported from the study area and are being carried by Lillooet River towards Pemberton, 40 km from Mount Meager, and farther downstream. These remobilized sediments likely reduce the Lillooet River channel capacity and thus increase flood hazards to the communities of Pemberton and Mount Currie. Our study indicates a landslide persistence in the landscape, with an estimated 47-year half-life decay, suggesting that higher flood hazard conditions related to increased sediment supply may last longer than previously estimated. This study shows the value of using SfM in tandem with historic aerial photographs, UAV photos, and high-resolution satellite imagery for determining sediment budgets in fluvial systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".