A heuristic simulation model of Lake Ontario circulation and mass balance transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The redistribution of suspended organisms and materials by large-scale currents is part of natural ecological processes in large aquatic systems but can contribute to ecosystem disruption when exotic elements are introduced into the system. Toxic compounds and planktonic organisms spend various lengths of time in suspension before settling to the bottom or otherwise being removed. We constructed a simple physical simulation model, including the influence of major tributaries, to qualitatively examine circulation patterns in Lake Ontario. We used a simple mass balance approach to estimate the relative water input to and export from each of 10 depth regime-specific compartments (nearshore vs. offshore) comprising Lake Ontario. Despite its simplicity, our model produced circulation patterns similar to those reported by more complex studies in the literature. A three-gyre pattern, with the classic large counterclockwise central lake circulation, and a simpler two-gyre system were both observed. These qualitative simulations indicate little offshore transport along the south shore, except near the mouths of the Niagara River and Oswego River. Complex flow structure was evident, particularly near the Niagara River mouth and in offshore waters of the eastern basin. Average Lake Ontario residence time is 8 years, but the fastest model pathway indicated potential transport of plankton through the lake in as little as 60 days. This simulation illustrates potential invasion pathways and provides rough estimates of planktonic larval dispersal or chemical transport among nearshore and offshore areas of Lake Ontario.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".