MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MCMASTER RIVER AND ARCTIC HYDROLOGY

2000· article· en· W2144871651 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ming‐ko Woo

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Geography · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostSnowmeltMeltwaterSnowHydrology (agriculture)ArcticSnow fieldEnvironmental scienceInfiltration (HVAC)Surface runoffSnowpackStreamflowGeologyDrainage basinSnow coverGeomorphologyOceanographyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a synopsis of research on arctic hydrology conducted in the catchment of the McMaster River, a river in the Canadian High Arctic that bears the name of our University. In snow hydrology, we found that terrain strongly affects the redistribution of the snow cover, and the weather stations sometimes register only half or one-third of the snow measured in their nearby areas. Snowmelt is dominated by radiation energy input and by sensible heat flux when the snow cover becomes patchy. Coldness of the snow leads to refreezing of the meltwater to form ice lenses, the most prominent being basal ice formed at the snow-ground boundary. Infiltration of meltwater into frozen ground depends on the soil materials but is limited compared with total melt. Much of the melt-water then runs off on slopes. Surface flow diminishes when thawing of the active layer above the permafrost enlarges the water storage capacity. Between the active layer and the atmosphere, vertical exchanges occur through such processes as evaporation and rainfall infiltration. Stream-flow regime reflects the dual control of snow and permafrost hydrology, yielding high flows during the melt season, followed by summer flows influenced by active layer processes. [Key words: snow cover, snowmelt, permafrost, arctic hydrology.]

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical GeographySame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207