MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003686080 · doi:10.4296/cwrj2803375

The Influence of Sub-Watershed Plans on the Ontario Planning Process

2003· article· en· W2003686080 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Robert Summers, Ryan Plummer, John FitzGibbon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Social Impact Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedWatershed managementEnvironmental planningPlan (archaeology)GroundwaterEnvironmental resource managementProcess (computing)Watershed areaWater resource managementBusinessEnvironmental scienceGeographyEngineeringComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ontario’s water management legacy is committed to utilizing natural systems, rather than addressing only political boundaries. While watershed and sub-watershed planning takes place independently from municipal planning, the successful implementation of many watershed plan recommendations are dependent largely upon their inclusion into municipal Official Plans. In this paper we examine the influence of watershed and sub-watershed plans on official plans and other land management issues in five municipalities. Content analysis revealed that the key elements of greenspaces, surface water protection and groundwater protection are reflected in official plans to varying degrees. Interviews confirmed these results and identified additional influences of watershed and sub-watershed planning such as utilization in environmental impact assessments and environmental management. Although it is premature to gauge the total impact of watershed planning in Ontario, the experience appears to offer beneficial outcomes.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicEnvironmental and Social Impact AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207