Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the period 1999 to 2003, river ice has continued to have important socio‐economic impacts in Canada and other Nordic countries. Concurrently, there have been many important advances in all areas of Canadian research into river ice engineering and hydrology. For example: (1) River ice processes were highlighted in two special journal issues (Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering in 2003 and Hydrological Processes in 2002) and at five conferences (Canadian Committee on River Ice Processes and the Environment in 1999, 2001 and 2003, and International Association of Hydraulic Research in 2000 and 2002). (2) A number of workers have clearly advanced our understanding of river ice processes by bringing together disparate information in comprehensive review articles. (3) There have been significant advances in river ice modelling. For example, both one‐dimensional (e.g. RIVICE, RIVJAM, ICEJAM, HEC‐RAS, etc.) and two‐dimensional (2‐D; www.river2d.ca ) public‐domain ice‐jam models are now available. Work is ongoing to improve RIVER2D, and a commercial 2‐D ice‐process model is being developed. (4) The 1999–2003 period is notable for the number of distinctly hydrological and ecological studies. On the quantitative side, many are making efforts to determine streamflow during the winter period. On the ecological side, some new publications have addressed the link to water quality (temperature, dissolved oxygen, nutrients and pollutants), and others have dealt with sediment transport and geomorphology (particularly as it relates to break‐up), stream ecology (plants, food cycle, etc.) and fish habitat. There is the growing recognition, that these types of study require collaborative efforts. In our view, the main areas requiring further work are: (1) to interface geomorphological and habitat models with quantitative river ice hydrodynamic models; (2) to develop a manager's toolbox (database management, remote sensing, forecasting, intervention methodologies, etc.) to enable agencies to intervene better at the time of ice‐jam‐induced floods; and (3) finalize ice‐jam prevention methods on the St Lawrence River to safeguard its $2 billion commercial navigation industry. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".