MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995298715 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3402127

Progress in Canadian Snow and Frozen Ground Hydrology, 2003-2007

2009· article· en· W1995298715 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Sean K. Carey, John W. Pomeroy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostHydrology (agriculture)SnowMarshSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceGeologyPhysical geographyGeomorphologyGeographyOceanographyWetlandEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews advances made in Canadian snow and frozen ground hydrology between 2003 and 2006, and follows the 1999 to 2002 review of Woo and Marsh (2005). In this assessment, frozen ground hydrology encompasses the influence of both seasonally and perennially frozen ground (permafrost) on hydrology. In reviewing snow hydrology, we exclude processes associated with precipitation, glaciers and snow avalanches. With respect to frozen ground, its influence on infiltration, percolation and runoff in both permafrost and more temperate environments continues to be an active area of research. The role of permafrost at the landscape scale, and its interaction with soil properties in controlling runoff, has received particular attention. In snow hydrology, knowledge on physical processes of accumulation, redistribution and melt continue to advance through both field experiments and numerical modelling in both natural and urban settings. There also continues to be research on snow chemistry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.209
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207