Trends in groundwater levels in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relations between groundwater level fluctuations and past climatic variations are explored using available data from the provincial observation well network, climate data and hydrometric data from the two major hydro-climatic zones of British Columbia. The majority of these well records start in the late 1970s or 1980s, providing only 20 to 30 years of record at most, and only a few of these wells monitor aquifers in “pristine” areas that reflect natural variability; the others have been influenced by human activity. Mean monthly groundwater levels were used to manually classify the wells into rainfall- and snowmelt-dominated seasonal cycles. Temporal trends of groundwater levels and a simple recharge measure were calculated using the non-parametric Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient over a common period from 1976–1999. This period was selected to coincide with the positive phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) so as to eliminate the potential impact a shift in the PDO might have on groundwater levels and recharge trends. Overall, late summer groundwater levels appear to have lowered across the province. Trends in recharge were more variable with both positive and negative trends. However, most of the trend results were non-significant. This assessment was complicated by the varied nature of the climate in different parts of the province, which determines the hydrologic regime (pluvial, nival, glacierized, mixed), the complexity of the groundwater system as it relates to the connection between groundwater and surface water, and the remote sources of many rivers in the mountainous regions of the province.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".