MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405538358 · doi:10.1139/cgj-2024-0329

Field measurements and modelling of climate-driven hydraulic flux, water content, and suction in a loess slope

2024· article· en· W4405538358 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katherine Yates, Adrian R. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilRoyal Society Te Apārangi
KeywordsHydraulic conductivityLoessWater contentInfiltration (HVAC)EvapotranspirationSoil scienceGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeologySoil waterSuctionHydrology (agriculture)GeomorphologyMaterials scienceMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rainfall-triggered shallow slope failures are common in New Zealand loess. While often unsaturated, rainfall infiltration reduces suction in the loess as the water content increases, resulting in reduction in shear strength and increased potential for slope instability. Here the hydraulic response of an in situ loess slope to natural rainfall and evapotranspiration is examined using long-term field instrumentation. Data from a 19-month monitoring period show that the loess’ hydraulic behaviour responds to change in seasonal climatic conditions, highlighting the relationship between moisture content and suction with evapotranspiration and infiltration. To simulate the field response, a one-dimensional steady infiltration/evapotranspiration model has been developed, exploiting the unique power laws which interrelate water content, suction and hydraulic conductivity which arise from a loess’s fractal particle and pore size distributions. Hydraulic hysteresis is also accounted for. Closed form expressions are derived for the subsurface suction profile, from which profiles of moisture content, hydraulic conductivity, and the suction’s contribution to strength may be obtained. Simulated subsurface water contents are in good agreement with field observations. Furthermore, fluxes across the loess surface used to obtain the modelled quantities are in general agreement with local climatic conditions and their variations during the monitoring period. Modelled and measured data are strongly correlated at shallow depths, having a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.53.

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)0.000
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.218
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical Journal→Same topicLandslides and related hazards→French-language works237,207→