MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402925354 · doi:10.1061/jenmdt.emeng-7931

Roll Waves in Mudflow Modeled as Herschel–Bulkley Fluids

2024· article· en· W4402925354 on OpenAlexaff
Boyuan Yu, Vincent H. Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Mechanics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMudflowGeologyHerschel–Bulkley fluidGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsPhysicsFluid dynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop a multilayer model to study roll waves in mudflow of Herschel–Bulkley fluids initiated by periodic and localized disturbance. Simulations are conducted of the temporal development of periodic roll waves and spatial development of wave packets due to localized disturbance. The results of the temporal development are expressed in terms of the power-law index, the relative plug-layer thickness, the Froude number, and the perturbation wavelength. Our simulation for the spatial development shows the roll waves led by a dominant front runner and followed by a quiescent tail, closely reproducing a well-known river-clogging phenomenon of the natural mudflow observed in the mountain rivers on mild slopes. The leading wave of the roll-wave packet, i.e., the front runner, grows in depth, velocity, celerity, and wavelength with distance from the localized disturbance. The front-runner wave amplitude depends on the distance from the localized disturbance, the power law index, the plug-layer thickness, and the Froude number. We calculated the front-runner’s wave amplitude due to a line source of disturbance in a 1D unidirectional development and the roll waves’ 2D development due to a point source. The initial nonlinear growth in the 2D front runner is a fraction of the 1D waves, but the increase in the wave amplitude with distance follows the same trend. We have also conducted a mesh refinement study to determine the convergence and accuracy. The present simulations using 64 layers have attained an accuracy within a 2% error.

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)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207