MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072120877 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3204251

Detection of Trends in Low Flows across Canada

2007· article· en· W2072120877 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Eghbal Ehsanzadeh, Kaz Adamowski

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Drought Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrend analysisGeographyLow latitudeStructural basinClimatologyLatitudeEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyGeologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study of trends and variability of low flow characteristics was conducted for the Reference Hydrometric Basin Network (RHBN). A seven-day low-flow index from 57 hydrometric stations was extracted and examined to detect trends and changes in the timing of summer and winter seven-day low-flows. A modified Mann-Kendall (MK) nonparametric trend test was applied to the time series at a 0.05 significance level. The variance of the S statistic was modified if the absolute value of serial correlation was significant at a 0.1 significance level. Numerical analysis indicated that northern Canada (stations located above latitude 60oN) experienced an increasing significant trend in seven-day low-flows. A significant downward trend dominated the Atlantic Provinces and southern British Columbia. No evidence of significant trends in the Prairies and eastern Ontario was found. Summer seven-day low-flow shifted to arrive earlier in the year in the Atlantic Provinces and southern Ontario; however, it arrived later in the year in western and northwestern Canada. In 88% of significant trends, winter seven-day low-flow shifted to arrive earlier. Although both winter and summer low flows experienced a shift towards earlier dates in the eastern part of the country, they were in opposite direction in western Canada where winter seven-day low-flows were arriving earlier whereas summer seven-day low-flows were arriving later in the year.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicHydrology and Drought AnalysisFrench-language works237,207