MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W82685355 · doi:10.18172/cig.2520

Geomorfología y restauración fluvial: seguimiento del derribo de presas en Gipuzkoa

2014· article· es· W82685355 on OpenAlexaff
Alfredo Ollero Ojeda, Askoa Ibisate, Vanesa Acín, P. Besne, Esperanza Dı́az, Carles Ferrer‐Boix, David Granado, Xabier Herrero, Jesús Horacio, Juan Pedro Martín Vide, Amaia Mesanza Moraza, D. Mora, Ignacio Montesdeoca Sánchez

Bibliographic record

VenueCuadernos de Investigación Geográfica · 2014
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Se presenta la metodología diseñada para el seguimiento geomorfológico del derribo de azudes, así como los resultados obtenidos hasta el momento en dos casos concretos: las presas de Mendaraz (río Urumea) e Inturia (río Leitzaran) en Gipuzkoa. Se han realizado secciones transversales, abundantes mediciones de procesos sobre testigos, análisis de los nuevos depósitos generados y muestreos granulométricos y morfométricos. En el caso de Mendaraz se han registrado rápidas movilizaciones de sedimentos e importantes cambios geomorfológicos aguas arriba y abajo del obstáculo. Este proceso de recuperación de la dinámica fluvial natural y de regularización del cauce fue favorecido y acelerado por la crecida extraordinaria de noviembre de 2011. Además de sus beneficios para el estado ecológico, se ha constatado que el derribo de presas es una medida eficaz para la restauración de la dinámica geomorfológica en cauces fluviales. El seguimiento geomorfológico es una labor fundamental para cuantificar y valorar la dinámica generada a raíz del derribo de la presa y toda su evolución posterior.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCuadernos de Investigación GeográficaSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207