The impact of macrophytes on winter flows along the Upper Qu’Appelle River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Upper Qu’Appelle River conveys water from Lake Diefenbaker to Buffalo Pound Lake, which is a major source of water for domestic, industrial, agricultural and recreational use in southern Saskatchewan. Water demand continues to increase with time and additional conveyance capacity may be required during the winter months. Flows in the Upper Qu’Appelle are usually below 2 m3 s–1 from December to March; however, an increase in this flow rate will be needed to meet future water demands. A numerical modelling study was carried out to simulate the degree of ice cover thickening and backwater staging during freeze-up at various discharge scenarios (up to 6 m3 s–1). The Monte Carlo framework was used to capture the variability of possible parameter ranges within various freeze-up scenarios. A bottleneck to flow conveyance is a short 4-km stretch along the river (between the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration [PFRA] and Tugaske Bridges) which is infested with macrophyte growth. Results show that the probability of overbank flow greatly increases with the presence of macrophytes in the channel, even at freeze-up conditions. Dredging was deemed the best mitigation option to reduce macrophyte density and remove nutrient-rich sediment to increase flow capacity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".