MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169201502 · doi:10.7451/cbe.2012.54.1.7

Evaluation of CANWET model for hydrologic simulations for upper Canagagigue Creek watershed in southern Ontario

2012· article· en· W2169201502 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Biosystems Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Hydrological modellingEnvironmental scienceGeologyWater resource managementComputer scienceClimatologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canagagigue Creek, plus de 90% des prcipitations lors des mois estivaux sont perdues par vapotranspiration, et plus de la moiti des prcipitations lors des mois hivernaux et printaniers rechargent la nappe phratique. Le modle CANWET a t dtermin comme tant un atout raisonnablement utile dans le calcul de bilan hydrique l'chelle de bassin versant sur des intervalles annuelles (R 2 = 0,89), saisonnires (R 2 = 0,68), et mensuelles (R 2 = 0,68). Mots-cls: CANWET, Modlisation de bassin versant, protection des sources d'eau, bilan hydrique.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.190 · 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