MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143783725 · doi:10.1577/m02-087

A New Tool for Measuring Sediment Accumulation with Minimal Loss of Fines

2004· article· en· W2143783725 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Lachance, Maryse Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)Ministère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCulvertSedimentEnvironmental scienceFontinalisSalvelinusSTREAMSHydrology (agriculture)TroutGrading (engineering)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringFisheryEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>GeomorphologyComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To measure the impact of culvert construction on brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis spawning beds, we collaborated with Bio-Innove, Inc., to develop a simple method for measuring the physical characteristics of streambeds and for quantifying the accumulation of fine sediment at spawning depth. We developed a modified version of the Wesche method that greatly limits fine-sediment loss at retrieval and the loss of the sediment collectors themselves. We found all 128 collectors after a 1–3-month period and all but 3 after 1 year in four experimental streams. The collectors are reusable and permit easy transfer of samples to the laboratory without any visible loss of fine sediment. The data collected allowed us to compare, by use of parametric statistics, the upstream and downstream sections from newly built culverts in terms of percent fines of different diameters, distance of sediment accumulation downstream, grading curves, and organic matter content of accumulated fine sediment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207