Evaluation of the Urban Hydrologic Metabolism of the Greater Moncton Region, New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study deals with the evaluation of the hydrologic metabolism of the Greater Moncton (GM) region, from a sustainable and integrated development of water resources perspective. The hydrological metabolism approach involves the quantification of water inputs and outputs. Therefore, a water balance for the region was carried out for the period 1984 to 2004. An average annual water volume was determined for each of the nine components used within the balance equation. Water inputs calculated for the system included: 263 × 106 m3/yr for total precipitation and 17.7 × 106 m3/yr for potable water produced at the water treatment plant. For system outputs, values were: 99.9 × 106 m3/yr for evapotranspiration, 110 × 106 m3/yr for infiltration, 22.7 × 106 m3/yr for wastewater at the sewage plant outlet (exfiltration 6.1 × 106 m3/yr), 37.7 × 106 m3/yr of the precipitation amount drained by the storm sewer network, 1.05 × 106 m3/yr for overflow and 3.55 × 106 m3/yr for potable water losses in the water distribution system. These input/output results were validated through an analysis of the water system’s calculated losses (20%) in relation to values estimated by the GM municipal authorities (between 10% and 20%). This study concluded that the approach and information provided offer many potential benefits that could lead to sustainable and integrated management of water resources in the GM region. It also provides an approach for municipal authorities within the GM region that could be incorporated as a tool to support their decision-making process. In addition, the information presented in this study could form the basis of an educational program.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".