Prediction of Pollutant Load in Stormwater Runoff from an Urban Residential Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pollutant load in urban stormwater runoff has become a major concern with respect to the impact on the water quality of receiving streams and detention ponds. Common pollutants of concern in the runoff are suspended solids and nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus). Past research efforts have attempted to use pollutant build-up equations to predict the increase in pollutant mass available for wash-off within a catchment. The total pollutant mass is generally expressed as a linear or exponential function of time between runoff events. Such functions are generally coupled with a wash-off equation, which predicts the varying extent to which a specific pollutant is transported out of the catchment during a runoff event. These simple models are not completely adequate, but they provide a reasonable starting point for further investigation into stormwater pollutant load generated from an urban residential catchment.In this paper, statistical models are proposed to predict the total mass of specific pollutants removed with stormwater runoff from an urban residential catchment. The statistical models are based upon analysis of data collected during an on-going research program in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. In this program, a small, primarily-residential urban catchment was monitored and sampled for six summers (1994–1999). Stormwater outflow from the catchment and rainfall intensity at three locations in and around the catchment were recorded during rainfall events. Also, during each event, a timed series of water samples was withdrawn from the catchment outflow and analyzed for suspended solids and nutrient concentrations.Various input parameters to the statistical models were tested to assess their significance. These parameters included variables describing the precipitation event generating the runoff, the antecedent precipitation event, and the dry period between current and antecedent events. The proposed models were formulated with the most significant input parameters and calibrated using the existing data set. At present, individual water quality parameter models result in prediction errors ranging from 2.3–88% of the observed pollutant load.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".