MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122028592 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3602815

Fresh Water-Related Indicators in Canada: An Inventory and Analysis

2011· article· en· W2122028592 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
G. Dunn, Karen Bakker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerformance indicatorEnvironmental resource managementScale (ratio)Indicator valueEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceBusinessGeographyEcologyMarketingCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of fresh water-related assessment indicators in Canada has proliferated rapidly over the past decade. This article presents a comprehensive review and evaluation of existing fresh water-related indicators in Canada, and analyzes the extent to which these indicators can be (and are being) used to guide effective water assessment. Specifically, the article presents an inventory of over 300 fresh water-related indicators, the first of its kind in Canada. This inventory is analyzed with respect to jurisdictional scale (federal and provincial), method, and topic/issue of focus. The results drawn from a national-level survey and follow-up interviews regarding the effectiveness and utility of assessment indicators are presented. The key drivers and trends in indicator development are then explored. These findings suggest that certain types of indicators and topics are under-represented, that important gaps and overlaps exist, and that indicators are not sufficiently adapted to the needs of decision-makers. This has resulted in systemic barriers to the effective use of indicators, which has reduced water assessment capacity in Canada.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.156
Teacher spread0.145 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations34
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207