{"id":"W2025832472","doi":"10.1139/a2012-009","title":"Meta-analyses of the effects of river flow on fish movement and activity","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Environmental Reviews","topic":"Fish Ecology and Management Studies","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":98,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"BC Hydro; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada; Canada Research Chairs","keywords":"River ecosystem; Habitat; Discharge; Environmental science; Fish <Actinopterygii>; Downstream (manufacturing); Upstream and downstream (DNA); Ecology; Fishery; Geography; Hydrology (agriculture); Upstream (networking); Biology; Geology; Drainage basin; Cartography","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003415825,0.0001373088,0.000389969,0.00001120052,0.0000786478,0.000001348547,0.0001273871,0.0000276667,0.0007835122],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004798037,0.00007631772,0.0002004195,0.00005151825,0.0003874815,0.0001103533,0.0003884323,0.0000638209,0.00007899644],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004854074,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":3.862341e-7,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0000216491,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00002201285,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991093,0.0001948555,0.0002002607,0.0001564852,0.0001871383,0.0001519092],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999377,0.0001079879,0.000205493,0.000274509,1.216542e-7,0.00003488523],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000382284,0.001982327,0.8322718,0.0003128916,0.002937745,0.000001253396,0.001296111,0.00008072519,0.05724627,0.00003583351,0.05716435,0.04663246],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001380306,0.00008040627,0.9393107,0.00001079834,0.00144558,1.825192e-7,0.00001020664,0.000008110899,0.03130715,0.00003955653,0.02757164,0.00007767784],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9921753,0.002750301,0.00003629399,0.0002409623,0.0001276066,0.0008082294,0.000007163579,0.000003545773,0.003850571],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9923207,0.00500474,0.0002548752,0.0012917,0.000008850088,0.00006998861,8.763405e-7,0.000005452794,0.001042799],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1070389,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.857891,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.05347759189434696,"score_gpt":0.275531306357534,"score_spread":0.2220537144631871,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}