MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100776700

Summary

2006· article· en· W7100776700 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGerman Economic Analysis & Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRheologyComputer simulationRock mass classificationRange (aeronautics)CalibrationContinuum mechanicsTerm (time)Numerical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical simulation can provide a useful tool for investigating the dynamics of phenomena like rock avalanches, within realistic geological contexts and in the framework of a better risk assess-ment and decision making. Difficulties in numerical modelling of a heterogeneous moving mass are mainly linked to the simulation of the complex behaviour assumed by the mass during propagation. The numerical code RASH3D, based on a continuum mechanics approach and on the long wave approximation, is used to back-analyse two cases of rock avalanches: Frank (1903, Canada) and Val Pola (1987, Italy). The two events are characterised by approximately the same volume (about 30 106m3) while the run out area morphologies are widely different. Three alternative ‘‘rheologies’ ’ (Frictional, Voellmy and Pouliquen) are used. Comparison among obtained results underlines that the validation of a ‘‘rheology’ ’ requires not only a good agreement between the numerical simulation results and the run out area boundaries but also in term of depth distribution of the mass in the deposit. In case of a Frictional rheology, the obtained calibrated dynamic friction angle values are in a range of 15 1 for both the cases; while assuming a Pouliquen or a Voellmy rheology it emerges a different behaviour of rheological parameters for each of the considered events. Besides the calibration of rheological parameters to better back-analyse each of the considered events, it is investigated how the behaviour due to the assumed rheology is influenced by the geometry of the run out area (e.g. narrow or broad valley).

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4920.348

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.168 · 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.

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGerman Economic Analysis & PoliciesFrench-language works237,207