MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The distribution and morphometry of lakes and reservoirs in British Columbia: a provincial inventory

2004· article· en· W1997359560 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Erik Schiefer, Brian Klinkenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlateau (mathematics)Physical geographyHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGlacial lakeEnvironmental scienceGeographyGlacier

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An inventory of provincial lakes and reservoirs has been developed to characterise and assess the distribution and morphometry of standing water bodies in British Columbia. In the province, there are over 241,500 lakes and reservoirs greater than 1,000 m 2 in size. These water bodies cover 2.37 percent of the province area and contain an estimated 521 km 3 of water (312 km 3 in natural lakes and 209 km 3 in reservoirs). A hypsometric relation suitable for order‐of‐magnitude estimates of lake volume from lake area is presented. Based on the distribution and morphometric attributes of lakes, several distinctive limnologic regions were identified, including the northeastern Alberta Plateau (highest proportion of circular lakes), the southwestern Alberta Plateau (lowest lake density/coverage and highest proportion of irregularly shaped lakes) and the Milbanke Strandflat (highest density of lakes). Observed regional and scale‐related patterns in lake distribution/morphometry appear to be largely related to geomorphic controls, particularly tectonic and glacial history. Large‐scale hydrologic implications of these standing water bodies and potential ecosystem/water resource management applications of the provincial inventory are also discussed.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Citations24
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207