Study of Flow Around Developed Permeable Pile Groyne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scouring and erosion commonly occur to form river morphology. This process could become a disaster if not managed properly. One of the solutions to this problem is controlling river flow and bed changes using groyne construction. Researchers have been studying the structure of groynes for decades, specifically focusing on the permeable pile groyne. In this study, the stability of the structure was considered to develop four models of permeable pile groynes, which were then compared with pile groyne models based on the Indonesia National Standard. Flow patterns and surface water elevation were mathematically investigated. The results show that the deceleration of velocity downstream of pile groynes can be controlled by adjusting the pile spacing. Three types of pile spacing in a group of groynes, (i.e., parallel to the flow, perpendicular to the flow, and oblique to the flow), significantly affect the flow pattern. Permeable pile groynes adhering to the Indonesian standard demonstrated reduction in velocity up to 83.68%. Meanwhile, the developed model M5 achieved velocity reductions of 72.64%. Model M5 is anticipated to be more stable due to higher permeability and the number of pile groups against with the lateral force. Consequently, this model could serve an alternative to the Indonesia National Standard for groyne design.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".