MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1045073106

Landscaping and water use : a look at outdoor watering practices and water consumption in Sherwood Park, Alberta

2013· article· en· W1045073106 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vanessa de Macedo Higgins

Bibliographic record

VenueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandscapingWater consumptionWater useConsumption (sociology)Public parkEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementGeographyEnvironmental planningEngineeringEcologyBiologySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Municipal water conservation programs often highlight water-wise landscaping as a method to reduce household water consumption. To determine if any relationships between landscaping and home water consumption exist in Strathcona County, Alberta, water consumption data for two neighbourhoods was collected. GIS mapping was used to compare these results with percentages of lawn and yard areas. Indoor and outdoor water use practices were explored through a door-to-door survey. Lawn size was found to have an impact on outdoor water consumption, per metre squared, with small lawns being the largest water users per area. No matter what vegetation is planted on the landscape, the size of yard also resulted in summer water use increases. Outside of programs to reduce lawn area, Strathcona County and other cold-climate communities could also look at behaviours such as frequency of watering and use of rain barrels to reduce summer water use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.155 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library)Same topicAmerican Environmental and Regional HistoryFrench-language works237,207