The Processes, Patterns and Impacts of Low Flows Across Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of low flow characteristics for six regions of Canada: the Arctic; the Mountains; the Prairies; southern Ontario; the Canadian Shield and the Atlantic.Processes that influence low flows are contrasted between the six regions examined.Data from a common analysis period for 51 gauging stations are used to evaluate flow duration curves and to explore the relationship between low flows and drainage area.The results reveal a diversity of processes influencing low flows and illustrate important regional differences in low flow characteristics and the impacts associated with low flows.Rsum : La prsente communication offre un survol des caractristiques de basses eaux pour six rgions du Canada : l'Arctique; les Rocheuses; les Prairies; le sud de l'Ontario; le Bouclier canadien et la rgion de l'Atlantique.Les processus qui influent sur les tiages sont compars entre les six rgions tudies.Les donnes obtenues partir d'une priode d'analyse commune pour 51 stations hydromtriques sont utilises afin d'valuer les courbes des valeurs classes des dbits et d'analyser la relation entre les basses eaux et les bassins hydrographiques.Les rsultats rvlent une diversit de processus qui influent sur les basses eaux et illustrent les importantes diffrences rgionales dans les caractristiques des basses eaux et dans les impacts qui y sont associs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it