MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1564420129

A multi-year hydrological data set for two research basins in the Mackenzie Delta region, NW Canada

2004· article· en· W1564420129 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philip Marsh, Cuyler Onclin, M. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueIAHS-AISH publication · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraClimatologySurface runoffBorealWater balanceEnvironmental scienceClimate changeCircumpolar starData setPhysical geographyDrainage basinStructural basinDeltaHydrology (agriculture)GeologyArcticGeographyOceanographyCartographyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been few, if any, studies of the water cycle in the vicinity of the treeline in northern Canada. Such data are required for circumpolar comparisons, for testing hydrological data, and, if the data available cover a sufficient length of time, for considering climate variability/change. In order to address these issues, this paper will present a 9-year data set for two research basins located in the boreal forest/tundra transition zone near Inuvik, NWT. On an annual basis, these data present the best estimate to date of the magnitude and relative importance of all water balance components, and these data have illustrated large inter-annual variability. However, given the short term covered by these data, it is not surprising that there is little evidence of a trend. The exception is a trend toward earlier spring melt, a longer runoff season, and a deeper active layer. These changes are in response to changes in temperature in the study area, as reported earlier.

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)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.320
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.055 · 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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIAHS-AISH publicationSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207