MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116662210 · doi:10.1641/b580808

Unintended Consequences of Urbanization for Aquatic Ecosystems: A Case Study from the Arizona Desert

2008· article· en· W2116662210 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioScience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersDivision of Graduate Education
KeywordsPerennial streamEcosystemEphemeral keyAridEnvironmental scienceEcosystem servicesWatershedHydrology (agriculture)UrbanizationRiparian zoneGroundwaterWater resource managementEcologySTREAMSGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many changes wrought during the construction of “designer ecosystems” are intended to ensure—and often succeed in ensuring—that a city can provide ecosystem goods and services; but other changes have unintended impacts on the ecology of the city, impairing its ability to provide these critical functions. Indian Bend Wash, an urbanizing watershed in the Central Arizona–Phoenix (CAP) ecosystem, provides an excellent case study of how human alteration of land cover, stream channel structure, and hydrology affect ecosystem processes, both intentionally and unintentionally. The construction of canals created new flowpaths that cut across historic stream channels, and the creation of artificial lakes produced sinks for fine sediments and hotspots for nitrogen processing. Further hydrologic manipulations, such as groundwater pumping, linked surface flows to the aquifer and replaced ephemeral washes with perennial waters. These alterations of hydrologic structure are typical by-products of urban growth in arid and semiarid regions and create distinct spatial and temporal patterns of nitrogen availability.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.204 · 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