Experiments on Constriction‐Pool‐Widening Morphology in Bedrock Canyons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bedrock rivers often alternate between relatively wide unconstrained reaches and conspicuously narrow deep incised bedrock reaches (canyons). These bedrock canyons exhibit a constriction‐pool‐widening (CPW) morphology that consists of a lateral constriction, a deeply scoured pool formed downstream of the constriction, and a channel widening at or near the pool exit. To explore how CPWs are formed in bedrock canyons, we hypothesize that the lateral constriction at the canyon entrance forces a CPW to form allogenically with subsequent CPWs propagating further downstream. Our hypothesis was tested experimentally in a flume channel with a forced lateral constriction at the canyon entrance. Our experiment shows that the forced constriction can cause a primary CPW to form allogenically because the backwater upstream of the forced constriction causes sediment deposition that creates an elevation drop, promoting flow and sediment to plunge toward the bed and carve a primary pool. Channel widening occurs at the primary pool exit because sediment deposit forms that deflects sediment into the banks, causing lateral erosion. Downstream of the primary widening, channel width declines and a new lateral constriction forms, which causes the formation of pools and widening downstream, resulting in downstream CPW propagation. In our experiment, the bedrock channel evolved until a persistent alluvial cover formed, reaching a steady state morphology without further vertical erosion until perturbed by higher discharge. Our experiment shows that discharge variation is necessary for a channel to evolve in the absence of uplift.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".