MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010661322 · doi:10.4296/cwrj2703245

Hydro-Climatic Trends in the Hudson Bay Region, Canada

2002· article· en· W2010661322 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alexandre S. Gagnon, William A. Gough

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNorthwestern University
KeywordsBayOceanographyEnvironmental scienceGeographyClimatologyGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Physical geographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term streamflow time series were analysed to provide evidence of climate change in the Hudson Bay region. We also investigated whether relationships exist between streamflow and proximal temperature and precipitation time series. The Mann-Kendall test for trend reveals an earlier occurrence of the spring peak flow in three rivers flowing into southern Hudson Bay, with a statistically-significant warming trend for spring temperature. In the northwestern Hudson Bay region, precipitation has significantly increased in all seasons, resulting in increasing trends in the discharge of the Kazan River. In contrast, a decrease in river discharge was detected in central Manitoba, because of warmer temperatures and less abundant rainfall. On the east side of Hudson Bay, statistically-significant streamflow trends were detected for individual months, but temporally and spatially coherent patterns could not be identified. This study of the Hudson Bay streamflow provides evidence of climate change using streamflow and climate data in the Hudson Bay region over the past century. The climate change signal is not spatially uniform and is obscured when the Hudson Bay basin is treated as a single large region.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations27
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207