MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2025064024 · doi:10.1115/ipc2006-10082

Assessment of Success Biostabilization Techniques on Selected Watercrossings in Alberta

2006· article· en· W2025064024 on OpenAlexaffabout
Albert Lees, Andrea Jalbert, M. Traverso

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1: Project Management; Design and Construction; Environmental Issues; GIS/Database Development; Innovative Projects and Emerging Issues; Operations and Maintenance; Pipelining in Northern Environments; Standards and Regulations · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)AXYS Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFencingHabitatEnvironmental scienceFisheryEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 1980’s TransCanada PipeLines Ltd. (TransCanada) has employed a number of stream bank stabilization measures in an effort to minimize the loss of fish habitat and to reduce the risk of long term erosion and sedimentation. Traditional stream crossing stabilization involved the re-contouring of streambanks to a stable slope (generally 2:1) and then lining the banks with rock armour and seeding. TransCanada began using alternate techniques, primarily log-walls in 1981. Since 1981 TransCanada has evolved the use stream bank stabilization techniques to include bio-stabilization techniques such as live log-walls, fascines, live staking, and brush layering in combination with more traditional structures. In 2004, TransCanada initiated a two year project to assess the success of biostabilization techniques used on a number of watercrossing throughout the its’ Alberta System. A total of 22 stream crossings were assessed in 2004 and 24 in 2005. Sites assessed were located the foothills and boreal forest areas of Alberta. In the majority of cases the biostabilization methods utilized were still intact and functioning as planned by providing stable streambanks and fish habitat. Several factors appeared to be influencing the value of the measures employed. Cattle grazing on sites where fencing did not exclude cattle from the crossing site resulted in destruction or reduced value of the measures employed. Uncontrolled All Terrain Vehicle activity resulted in a reduced value of the measure employed. Implementation of biostabilization techniques in the winter months (frozen ground conditions) created challenges in implementation of biostabilization measures resulting in less favorable results compared to other sites constructed in early and late fall. Seeding to control surface erosion also appeared to affect overall success of woody vegetation used as part of the biostabilization techniques. Biostabilization techniques employed by TransCanad have been effective in stabilizing watercrossings and providing fish habitat. In designing biostabilization systems for watercrossings consideration should be given to overall stabilization objectives, stream flow information, fish and fish habitat values, and likelihood of success given the geographic region, timing of construction, and surrounding land-use pressures.

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)0.001
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 score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 1: Project Management; Design and Construction; Environmental Issues; GIS/Database Development; Innovative Projects and Emerging Issues; Operations and Maintenance; Pipelining in Northern Environments; Standards and Regulations→Same topicSoil erosion and sediment transport→French-language works237,207→