MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036631283 · doi:10.1029/2008eo280004

Cold Regions Hydrology and Water Management: Bridging the Gap: Prediction of Water Resources in Mountain and Northern Canada: What is Needed, What Can be Done—An IP3 Users/Stakeholders Community Workshop; Canmore, Alberta, Canada, 18–19 March 2008

2008· article· en· W2036631283 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julie Fridell, John W. Pomeroy

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticWater resourcesStreamflowSnowRecreationStructural basinEnvironmental scienceAgricultureClimate changeGeographyEnvironmental resource managementDrainage basinHydrology (agriculture)OceanographyMeteorologyEcologyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improved Processes and Parameterisation for Prediction in Cold Regions (IP3) is a research network funded by the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (http://www.usask.ca/ip3). With more than 80 members across Canada, the United States, and Europe, IP3 is devoted to the study and prediction of surface water, weather, and climate systems in cold regions, particularly Canada's Rocky Mountains and western Arctic. IP3 contributes to better understanding of ungauged basin streamflow, snow and water supplies, Arctic Ocean freshwater inputs, and sustainable management of mountain and northern water resources. These issues are important to agriculture, recreation, industrial development, regional planning, policy making, streamflow forecasting, and environmental conservation in the Canadian Rockies, prairies, and north.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207