MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2002670291 · doi:10.1139/l05-084

Estimation des débits sous glace dans le sud du Québec : comparaison de modèles neuronal et déterministe

2005· article· en· W2002670291 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Richard Turcotte, Anne‐Catherine Favre, Pierre J. Lacombe, Charles Poirier, Jean‐Pierre Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStream flowArtificial neural networkSnowmeltHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceFlow (mathematics)MeteorologyComputer scienceGeologyGeographySnowMathematicsCartographyDrainage basinArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time assessments of stream flows under ice cover, using two distinct objective approaches, were compared over a 5-year period. Approaches based on artificial neural networks, defining mathematical relationships between stream flow, water level, and air temperature, and on a deterministic hydrological model were applied at eight gauged sites located in southern Quebec. Good results were obtained using both approaches, when no snowmelt contributes to the rise of the inflows. In the other hydrological situations, the neural network results were the best, but results of both approaches were sensibly poorer. Nevertheless, the potential for increasing the skills of the deterministic model seems high. Otherwise, a preliminary analysis showed that both approaches lead to stream-flow estimations that are not radically worse than the ones performed by the team of experts.Key words: discharge measurement, hydrology, ice-affected stream flow, hydrological modeling, neural network.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→