MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028281240

Encinitas-Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project Integrated Feasibility Report & Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR), San Diego County, California, Volume I

2015· report· en· W7028281240 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUS Army Corps of Engineers: Engineer Research and Development Center (Knowledge Core) · 2015
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeMassachusetts Department of Fish and GameFondation Pour La Conservation Du Saumon AtlantiqueCalifornia Department of Fish and GameCalifornia Energy CommissionU.S. Army Corps of EngineersCalifornia Air Resources Board
KeywordsEnvironmental impact assessmentImpact assessmentStormReduction (mathematics)Volume (thermodynamics)Environmental impact statement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Final Integrated Feasibility Study Report and Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Integrated Report) presents a summary of the ongoing planning process for the Encinitas-Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project (Project).The purpose of the Project is to effectively reduce risks to public safety and economic damages associated with bluff and beach erosion along the shorelines of the Cities of Encinitas and Solana Beach.A secondary purpose is to reduce erosion and shoreline narrowing to improve recreational opportunities.The Federal lead agency responsible for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (USACE).The local lead agencies responsible for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are the City of Encinitas and the City of Solana Beach.The recommended plan for Encinitas is EN-1B and for Solana Beach is SB-1B, which together compose the Locally Preferred Plan.The recommended plan is comprised of beach nourishment of a 50 foot (ft) wide beach for the City of Encinitas with renourishment cycles, on average, every 5 years and a 150 ft wide beach for the City of Solana Beach with renourishment cycles, on average, every 10 years.The recommended plan will result in an initial placement of sand of 340,000 cubic yards (cy) at Encinitas and 700,000 cy at Solana Beach.Sand would be dredged from offshore, beyond the depth of closure, using borrow sites designated as SO-5, SO-6, and MB-1.That material would then be placed directly onto the two receiver sites within Encinitas and Solana Beach.Impacts associated with the Encinitas alternatives have been evaluated for all resource topics and were determined to be less than significant for all resources except for the potential for discovery of unknown cultural resources at the borrow sites during dredging.Impacts associated with the Solana Beach alternatives have been evaluated for all resource topics and determined to be less than significant for all resources except biological resources, and the potential for discovery of cultural resources at the borrow sites during dredging.Mitigation is proposed for the impacts identified under each alternative and the severity of these impacts is directly relative to the size of the proposed beach and associated number of days for construction, with the greatest potential for impacts to occur associated with Alternative SB-1A and SB-2A, and reduced severity of potential impacts associated with Alternative SB-1C and SB-2B.Mitigation for each alternative reduces all impacts to a level below significance.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.006

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUS Army Corps of Engineers: Engineer Research and Development Center (Knowledge Core)Same topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207