MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404998075 · doi:10.1029/2024jf007641

Theoretical Solution Linking Channel Width and Pool‐Riffle Bed Level Perturbations

2024· article· en· W4404998075 on OpenAlexafffund
Yunlong Lei, E. Viparelli, Marwan A. Hassan, Shawn Chartrand, Chenge An, Xudong Fu, Chunhong Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Earth Surface · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRiffleChannel (broadcasting)Hydrology (agriculture)Flow (mathematics)AlluviumGeologyEnvironmental scienceMechanicsGeomorphologySTREAMSGeotechnical engineeringComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gravel bed rivers often display pool‐riffle morphology. Downstream changes in channel width are often correlated with pool‐riffle topography. Considering self‐formed, alluvial, straight and single‐thread gravel‐bed rivers, here we provide an analytical solution for their equilibrium pool‐riffle morphology in the presence of spatially varying widths. Our analytical model, based on mass and energy conservation for water flow, shows how bed level perturbations are closely linked to downstream width variations under the influence of water discharge. The analytical model is validated against experimental data and applied to reconstruct the natural pool‐riffle bed profile. The validated model shows how increasing water discharge (i.e., water depth and flow velocity) enhances the amplitude of pool‐riffle sequences. The proposed model can provide valuable guidance for river restoration projects.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research Earth SurfaceSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207