MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005015105 · doi:10.1007/s11284-009-0630-5

A revaluation of lake‐phosphorus loading models using a Bayesian hierarchical framework

2009· article· en· W2005015105 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto Scarborough
KeywordsHierarchical database modelPhosphorusBayesian hierarchical modelingEnvironmental scienceBayesian inferenceTrophic levelStatisticsPredictabilityBayesian probabilityInflowLimnologyEcologyMathematicsHydrology (agriculture)EconometricsComputer scienceBiologyMeteorologyData miningGeographyGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We revisit the phosphorus‐retention and nutrient‐loading models in limnology using a Bayesian hierarchical framework. This methodological tool relaxes a basic assumption of regression models fitted to data sets consisting of observations from multiple systems, i.e., the systems are assumed to be identical in behavior, and therefore the models have a single common set of parameters for all systems. Under the hierarchical structure, the models are dissected into levels (hierarchies) that explicitly account for the role of significant sources of variability (e.g., morphometry, mixing regime, geographical location, land‐use patterns, trophic status), thereby allowing for intersystem parameter differences. Thus, the proposed approach is a compromise between site‐specific (where limited local data is a problem) and globally common (where heterogeneous systems in wide geographical areas are assumed to be identical) parameter estimates. In this study, we used critical values of the mean lake depth and the hydraulic residence time ( τ w = 2.6 years) to specify the hierarchical levels of the models. Our analysis demonstrates that the hierarchical configuration led to an improvement of the performance of six out of the seven hypothesized relationships used to predict lake‐phosphorus concentrations. We also highlight the differences in the posterior moments of the group‐specific parameter distributions, although the inference regarding the importance of different predictors (e.g., inflow‐weighted total phosphorus input concentration, and hydraulic retention time) of lake phosphorus or the relative predictability of the models examined are not markedly different from an earlier study by Brett and Benjamin. The best fit to the observed data was obtained by the model that considers the first‐order rate coefficient for total phosphorus loss from the lake as an inverse function of the lake hydraulic retention time. Finally, our analysis also demonstrates how the Bayesian hierarchical framework can be used for assessing the exceedance frequency and confidence of compliance of water‐quality standards. We conclude that the proposed methodological framework will be very useful in the policy‐making process and can optimize environmental management actions in space and time.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.269 · 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