Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes an investigation of riverbank erosion at the Trans Canada Highway at the bridge over the Beaver River. Fieldwork was conducted to gather information about river flow velocity, estimated discharge, bar pebble distribution and bank sediment size and cohesiveness. Further information was gathered including a retroactive field assessment, aerial photographs, historical climate data and discharge trends to help determine why the bank is eroding at this location, an estimation of a rate of erosion and the potential implications of the bank erosion. The methodology for the fieldwork was crude and therefore did not provide conclusive results. Results indicated that the Beaver River bank was eroding due to change in meander characteristics and bank erosion is exacerbated by high flow events in the summer months (May to July), less cohesive bank material, debris obstructions and possibly by poor rip-rap construction. Only a rough rate of erosion could be determined based on aerial photography review but still requires further field work at a later date for comparison with measurements taken during the field work conducted for this paper. The potential implications of bank erosion at this location included undermining of the bridge construction, a wash out of the Trans Canada Highway which would result in impact on BC
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.488 | 0.261 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".