Climate and water availability indicators in Canada: Challenges and a way forward. Part I – Indicators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate variability influences the availability of water resources throughout Canada, and projected climate change is anticipated to affect future water availability. This is the first paper of a three-part analysis of water availability indicators in Canada (Parts II and III, this issue). The concept of water availability has been described in different ways in the literature. In Part I, the various approaches for estimating water availability are reviewed and compared, with a focus on Canadian studies. Global examples are used when necessary. The approaches to estimate water availability are organized into three categories: (1) climate-based indicators, (2) hydrology-based indicators and (3) water demand/supply-based indicators. Climate-based indicators use variables such as precipitation, and potential or actual evapotranspiration to calculate water budgets. Widely used meteorological drought indices that calculate moisture surpluses and deficits are also examined. Hydrology-based indicators focus on variables such as observed or modeled streamflow, or runoff. Water demand/supply-based indicators tend to focus on comparing the volume of available water with the amount of water used. Some conclusions on the status of water availability estimates in Canada are provided.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".