Experimental Investigation of the Pressure Distribution beneath a Floating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is known that discrete ice floes approaching an ice cover from upstream will contribute to the lengthening of the cover or will become entrained in the flow. The entrained floe could be deposited beneath the ice cover contributing to the thickness of the cover. In the case of an existing ice jam, it is possible that the entrained ice floes may be transported under the ice jam down past the toe and then propelled upwards, impacting the intact sold ice cover downstream. Such occurrences would have the potential to crack and weaken the cover, which might in turn result in the release of the ice jam. If true, specific knowledge of the hydrodynamic forces acting on individual ice floes will be an important component of any model which attempts to predict the occurrence of ice jam release events. Experimental studies were conducted in a re-circulating flume in the T. Blench Hydraulics Laboratory at the University of Alberta to increase the knowledge of the physical behaviour of ice floes in water, and the hydrodynamic forces that act on them. To achieve this, a hollow Plexiglas ice block outfitted with pressure taps, was constructed to facilitate measurements of the pressure distribution beneath an ice block. The dynamic pressure was measured under the block for various block thickness to depth ratios and flow velocities. The ice block stability was then
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".