MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056558281

Evaluation of large sand-filled geotextile containers as a temporary flood protection product

2015· dissertation· en· W7056558281 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlood mythGeotextileProduct (mathematics)Dispose patternFlood mitigation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of temporary flood protection is highly variable depending on the location, application, and the nature of flood events. This thesis evaluates sand-filled geotextile containers used as flood protection products within a framework of standardized tests. Specifically, Syn-Tex Wave Breakers and Super Sandbags are tested in both laboratory and field settings to quantify seepage rates, stability and durability. This allows informed decisions to be made regarding appropriate applications for each temporary flood protection product, and identifies areas for product improvement and development. The products tested performed well over the range of loading conditions applied. Large sand-filled geotextiles would be well-suited for situations where stakeholders have a low tolerance for risk, and there is adequate site access for the construction equipment required for installation. An ideal installation would be a long, relatively straight stretch where vertical product/wall and product/product interfaces can be minimized.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207