MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032392946 · doi:10.1139/x03-087

Stream temperatures in two shaded reaches below cutblocks and logging roads: downstream cooling linked to subsurface hydrology

2003· article· en· W2032392946 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Anthony Story, R. D. Moore, J. Stevenson Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd
KeywordsHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceSTREAMSInfiltration (HVAC)InflowGroundwaterStreamflowGeologyDrainage basinGeographyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined water temperature patterns and their physical controls for two small, clearing-heated streams in shaded reaches downstream of all forestry activity. Field observations were made during July–August 2000 in the central interior of British Columbia, Canada. For both reaches, downstream cooling of up to 4°C had been observed during daytime over distances of ~200 m. Radiative and convective exchanges of energy at heavily shaded sites on both reaches represented a net input of heat during most afternoons and therefore could not explain the observed cooling. In one stream, the greatest downstream cooling occurred when streamflow at the upstream site dropped below about 5 L·s –1 . At those times, temperatures at the downstream site were controlled mainly by local inflow of groundwater, because the warmer water from upstream was lost by infiltration in the upper 150 m of the reach. Warming often occurred in the upper subreach, where cool groundwater did not interact with the channel. At the second stream, creek temperature patterns were comparatively stable. Energy balance estimates from one afternoon suggested that groundwater inflow caused about 40% of the ~3°C gross cooling effect in the daily maximum temperature, whereas bed heat conduction and hyporheic exchange caused about 60%.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations166
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207