MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6938968318 · doi:10.60692/trs18-znr85

Previously hidden landslide processes revealed using distributed acoustic sensing with nanostrain-rate sensitivity

2024· article· en· W6938968318 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityBGC Engineering (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandslideSensitivity (control systems)AccelerationFault scarpInstrumentation (computer programming)Temporal resolutionExtensometerMetre

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Landslides can sometimes creep for decades before undergoing runaway acceleration and experiencing catastrophic failure. Observing and monitoring the evolution of strain in time and space is crucial to understand landslide processes, including the transition from slow to fast movement. However, the limited spatial or temporal resolution of existing landslide monitoring instrumentation limits the study of these processes. We present a method employing distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) strain data below 1 Hertz frequency over a three-day period of rainfall and quantify strain-rate changes at meter and sub-minute scales. The results reveal rainfall-triggered landslide processes, beginning with the onset of near-surface strain changes at the head scarp. Strain acceleration at a developing rupture zone, retrogression towards the scarp and flow-lobe activity is observed as the rainfall continues. The DAS-inferred processes with displacements of less than 0.5 mm are undetected using other landslide monitoring techniques. Our method illuminates landslide processes occurring with nanostrain-rate sensitivity at spatiotemporal resolution previously not possible.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information System→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→