Regulations, legislation, and guidelines for artificial surface water and groundwater tracer tests in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes Canadian federal and provincial regulations, legislation, and guidelines for artificial tracer tests, where substances are released into water, and provides a world-wide comparison. Alberta is currently the only Canadian province with guidelines and regulations relating to those tests. None of the other provinces have specific tracer test regulations in place, though the injection of artificial substances into waters is covered by Section 36(3) of the federal Fisheries Act. Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, and Nunavut sometimes require a permit to conduct a tracer test, and Quebec is planning to implement guidelines and regulations based on Michigan/USA Environmental Quality guidelines. In each case Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Environment Canada, and the Provincial environment departments should be contacted and the proposed test described as detailed as necessary. We present potential tracers, such as uranine (sodium fluorescein), or Rhodamine WT, that can be used in artificial tracer tests. This study is the result of contacting personnel from organizations such as Environment Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, provincial departments of environment, researchers, and consultants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".