MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004442226 · doi:10.4141/cjss09066

Development of a method for estimating the likelihood of crack flow in Canadian agricultural soils at the landscape scale

2010· article· en· W2004442226 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Humaira Dadfar, Suzanne Allaire, R. De Jong, Éric van Bochove, Georges Thériault, Farida Dechmi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceTile drainageHydrology (agriculture)AgricultureSoil waterDrainageContaminationGroundwaterSurface waterRisk assessmentWater resource managementEnvironmental engineeringSoil scienceGeographyGeologyEcologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indicators of risk of water contamination by agricultural pollutants are developed in Canada to assess sustainability of agriculture. Crack flow (CF), a key pathway for sub-surface contaminant transport, is part of the transport-hydrology algorithm used in two of these risk indicators. The objective was to develop a methodology for predicting the likelihood of CF in Canadian agricultural soils at the landscape scale. The algorithm considers soil clay content, crack development followed by a runoff event based on water budget, tile drainage, and crops. More than 40% of Canadian farmlands had moderate to very high likelihood of CF, mainly in Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, due to frequent runoffs on cracked clay soils potentially contributing to groundwater contamination. In Ontario and Quebec, farmlands with high CF likelihood correspond to regions under intensive tile drainage, which increases the risk of lateral translocation of contaminants to surface water bodies. Besides being a component of risk indicators of water contamination by phosphorus and coliforms, the CF algorithm and maps can be used to identify areas at risk of subsurface water contamination. Best management practices, adapted to reduce CF can then be targeted to these areas.Key words: Agrichemicals, contaminant transport, macropore flow, preferential flow, risk assessment, risk indicators

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207