MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093810350 · doi:10.3390/w7020615

Quantifying the Fecal Coliform Loads in Urban Watersheds by Hydrologic/Hydraulic Modeling: Case Study of the Beauport River Watershed in Quebec

2015· article· en· W2093810350 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amélie Thériault, Sophie Duchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStormwaterEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)WatershedSurface runoffFecal coliformCombined sewerStorm Water Management ModelWater qualityOutfallUrban runoffEnvironmental engineeringEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-step method for the identification of the main sources of fecal coliforms (FC) in urban waters and for the analysis of remedial actions is proposed. The method is based on (1) The statistical analysis of the relationship between rainfall and FC concentrations in urban rivers; (2) The simulation of hydrology and hydraulics; and (3) Scenario analysis. The proposed method was applied to the Beauport River watershed, in Canada, covering an area of 28.7 km2. FC loads and concentrations in the river, during and following rainfall events, were computed using the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) hydrological/hydraulic simulation model combined with event mean concentrations. It was found that combined sewer overflows (CSOs) are the main FC sources, and that FC from stormwater runoff could still impair recreational activities in the Beauport River even if retention tanks were built to contain CSOs. Thus, intervention measures should be applied in order to reduce the concentration of FC in stormwater outfalls. The proposed method could be applied to water quality components other than FC, provided that they are present in stormwater runoff and/or CSOs, and that the time of concentration of the watershed is significantly lower than their persistence in urban waters.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207