MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062302717

Tidal influence on flow structure and dune morphology, Fraser River Estuary, British Columbia, Canada

2001· dissertation· en· W7062302717 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2001
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Power Generation Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEstuaryTidal accelerationFlow (mathematics)Acoustic Doppler current profilerChannel (broadcasting)Mean flowFlow velocityFlood myth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the influence of tidal motion on velocity flow structure and dune morphology in the Fraser River Estuary near Vancouver, British Columbia. An acoustic Doppler Profiler (ADP) and high resolution survey echosounder were used to simultaneously record flow velocity and dune form over the course of one tidal cycle along a 250 m reach of the Main Channel of the Fraser River on June 20, 2000. Eight large symmetric dunes were analyzed During the tidal cycle mean velocity follows changes in tidal stage although deceleration on the flood tide is more rapid than during the ebb tide. Due to continuous flow disequilibrium in the estuary, a 'memory' of previous flow conditions is retained next to the bed. This 'memory' results in kinked velocity profiles that must be regarded with caution when calculating shear stress estimates. Dune height increased on the failing tide and decreased on the rising tide, indicating that the response time required for the adjustment of dune height to mean velocity is considerably less than one tidal cycle.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.166 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicAdvanced Power Generation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207