MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Use of Riparian Vegetation in Stream‐Temperature Modification

2000· article· en· W2014973446 on OpenAlex
Robert T. LeBlanc, Robert D. Brown

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater and Environment Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphDartmouth General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiparian zoneSTREAMSVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceStream restorationTree plantingRiparian forestFish <Actinopterygii>Hydrology (agriculture)Environmental resource managementComputer scienceEcologyAgroforestryEngineeringFisheryHabitatGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes a framework for estimating the effectiveness of riparian vegetation in modifying the water temperature in streams. A physically‐based model was incorporated into the framework and used to demonstrate that planting trees in strategic locations can have a substantial effect on water temperature in streams and, consequently, on the survival of target fish populations. Application of the framework suggested that equivalent plantings in different configurations can have markedly different outcomes in terms of resultant stream temperature. There is no single best solution for all stream‐restoration projects but, through the use of this framework, environmental planners, designers and managers can compare scenarios and make appropriate decisions for specific streams.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.176 · 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