MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981282401 · doi:10.4296/cwrj2603359

Techniques for Controlling Total Suspended Solids in Stormwater Runoff

2001· article· en· W1981282401 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yaser Shammaa, David Z. Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStormwaterSurface runoffInfiltration (HVAC)Environmental scienceDetention basinSwaleTotal suspended solidsSuspended solidsWetlandHydrology (agriculture)Retention basinEnvironmental engineeringFiltration (mathematics)DrainageWastewaterGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringGeographyChemical oxygen demandMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stormwater runoff is the major source of total suspended solids (TSS) released into the environment. This paper presents a state-of-the-art review of techniques for removing TSS from stormwater runoff. Three main categories of techniques are presented: infiltration, filtration and detention. Infiltration trenches, infiltration basins and porous pavements are discussed as the common infiltration practices. Filtration systems include filter strips, grassed swales and media filters. Wet and dry detention ponds and constructed wetlands are the most common detention practices. Polymer-assisted stormwater ponds are also discussed. The function, performance and suitability of each technique are discussed, and a comprehensive review is provided to guide the selection of a suitable TSS control technique.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations31
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207