MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1916782059 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.r223-23

Sources of Pollutants in Urban Areas (Part 1) - Older Monitoring Projects

2005· article· en· W1916782059 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert E. Pitt, Roger T. Bannerman, Shirley E. Clark, Derek Williamson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutantEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceBusinessEnvironmental resource managementGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information concerning source area runoff characteristics during wet weather events can be very important when developing stormwater management plans that incorporate source area controls, or changes in development patterns. This information is also important when calibrating or testing many stormwater models. Unfortunately, this information is not readily available and can be expensive and tedious to collect. However, a substantial amount of these data have been collected over the past several decades, but are not well known. This chapter, and the next, present summaries of these data, specifically source area sheetflow and particulate quality for a variety of areas. Information is presented for many source areas, including urban wet and dry atmospheric deposition, roofs, urban soils, streets and other pavements. Information showing concentrations of conventional pollutants, heavy metals, and selected organic compounds is summarized for major land use categories. The following chapter summarizes additional source area sheetflow information obtained during detailed projects in Alabama and Wisconsin during the 1990s, and summarizes newer data collected elsewhere.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations25
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207