MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MODELING THE IMPACTS OF WATER LEVEL CHANGES ON A GREAT LAKES COMMUNITY<sup>1</sup>

2004· article· en· W1992221240 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ryan Schwartz, Peter Deadman, Daniel Scott, Linda Mortsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooNatural Resources Canada
FundersPublic Works and Government Services CanadaGovernment of CanadaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsShoreClimate changeDredgingEnvironmental scienceBathymetryWater levelHydrology (agriculture)Range (aeronautics)Geographic information systemWater resource managementOceanographyGeographyGeologyRemote sensingCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Recent research that couples climate change scenarios based on general circulation models (GCM) with Great Lakes hydrologic models has indicated that average water levels are projected to decline in the future. This paper outlines a methodology to assess the potential impact of declining water levels on Great Lakes waterfront communities, using the Lake Huron shoreline at Goderich, Ontario, as an example. The methodology utilizes a geographic information system (GIS) to combine topographic and bathymetric datasets. A digital elevation surface is used to model projected shoreline change for 2050 using water level scenarios. An arbitrary scenario, based on a 1 m decline from February 2001 lake levels, is also modeled. By creating a series of shoreline scenarios, a range of impact and cost scenarios are generated for the Goderich Harbor and adjacent marinas. Additional harbor and marina dredging could cost as much as CDN $7.6 million. Lake freighters may experience a 30 percent loss in vessel capacity. The methodology is used to provide initial estimates of the potential impacts of climate change that can be readily updated as more robust climate change scenarios become available and is adaptable for use in other Great Lakes coastal communities.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations22
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources AssociationSame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207