MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404538438 · doi:10.3390/jmse12112103

Nearshore Migration of Munitions and Canonical Objects Under Large-Scale Laboratory Forcing

2024· article· en· W4404538438 on OpenAlexaff
Temitope Ezekiel Idowu, Emily Chapman, Manoj K. Gangadharan, Jacob Stolle, Jack A. Puleo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersStrategic Environmental Research and Development Program
KeywordsSwashSurf zoneSubmarine pipelineGeologyShoreBathymetryForcing (mathematics)Wave setupBeach morphodynamicsOceanographySediment transportGeomorphologyWave propagationSedimentClimatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A quantitative understanding of the migration of munitions and canonical objects in the nearshore is needed for the effective management of contaminated sites. Migrations of munitions with a density range of 2000 kg/m3 to 5720 kg/m3 were quantified in a large-scale wave flume. The forcing consisted of six cases of varying wave heights, periods, still water depths, and durations. The cross-shore profile, typical of natural sandy beaches, was sub-divided into swash, surf, and offshore zones. Overall, 2228 migration measurements were recorded with 16% and 84% of the migration observations classified as “motion” (net distance > 0.5 m) and “no motion” (net distance ≤ 0.5 m), respectively. The probability of munitions migration increased with proximity to the shoreline. There was a nearly equal probability of onshore or offshore migration in the swash zone. Migration in the surf zone tended to be offshore-directed (65%), while migration was onshore-dominant (65%) in the offshore zone. Migration in the offshore zone was preferentially onshore due to skewed waves over flat bathymetry. Less dense munitions in the offshore zone may have migrated offshore likely still related to the skewed nature of the wave profile causing transport in both directions through the majority of the wave phase. The largest migration distances occurred in the surf zone likely due to downslope gravity. Migration in the surf and swash zones is a balance between skewed/asymmetric forcing and downslope gravity, with downslope gravity tending to be pronounced provided the forcing is sufficient to initiate motion. An exception was sometimes observed in the swash zone where onshore forcing was sufficient to transport munitions to the seaward side of the berm where they became trapped in a bathymetric depression between the dune and berm. Relating overall migration (Lagrangian) to fixed hydrodynamic measurements (Eulerian) was ineffective. Parameters such as the Shields number, wave skewness, and wave asymmetry estimated from the closest measurement location were insufficient to predict migration. Large scatter in the migration data resulting from competing hydrodynamic, morphodynamic, and munitions response processes makes robust deterministic predictions with flow statistics and dimensionless numbers difficult.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
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 designBench or experimental
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 Marine Science and EngineeringSame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207