MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172209147 · doi:10.1061/9780784479025.005

Modeling Sedimentation in Underground Stormwater Detention Chamber Systems

2015· article· en· W2172209147 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicholas McIntosh, Jennifer Drake, Dean Young, Jason Spencer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental and Sediment Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto and Region Conservation AuthorityUniversity of Toronto
FundersMitacs
KeywordsStormwaterSedimentationSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceDetention basinHydraulicsEnvironmental engineeringHydrology (agriculture)Retention basinUrban runoffGeologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringGeomorphologySedimentEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Ontario, underground stormwater detention chamber systems (USDC) are a somewhat new alternative to wet detention ponds for the detention and treatment of urban stormwater runoff. Few tools are available for designers to predict the removal of contaminants from USDC. A conceptual model was developed to fill this void and make USDC a more approachable solution to stormwater management. The model for underground detention sedimentation (MUDS) predicts the removal efficiency of total suspended solids through sedimentation based on the hydraulic properties of USDC. As runoff enters the USDC, waves of particles are released, the pathline of these particles are tracked along vertical and longitudinal axes as they move through the USDC to determine whether a given diameter of particle is removed by sedimentation. Based on the particle size distribution and the density of the particles, the mass removal efficiency is determined. The model was found to adequately predict the hydraulics and treatment efficiency of USDC.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnvironmental and Sediment ControlFrench-language works237,207