MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Continuous Dye Injection System for Estimating Discharge in Snow-choked Streams

2004· article· en· W2176195590 on OpenAlexaff
M. Russell, Philip Marsh, Cuyler Onclin

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Antarctic and Alpine Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceDilutionSnowSnowmeltSTREAMSHydrology (agriculture)OutflowStreamflowSurface runoffSampling (signal processing)MeteorologyGeologyDrainage basinGeotechnical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A simple method is presented which demonstrates the use of continuously injected Rhodamine WT dye to provide automated around-the-clock estimates of flow during the spring breakup. Dye of a known concentration is injected at a constant rate upstream from a sampling point, and the dilution of the dye in the sampled downstream water is a measure of discharge. Field trials conducted in and around Inuvik, Northwest Territories in two small snow-choked streams during spring breakup of 1995 to 1999 suggest that some dye is adsorbed to suspended sediment in the stream channel, resulting in an overestimate of discharge. However, there is still a strong linear relationship between the discharge as estimated by the dye method and that determined by conventional current metering. Correcting the dye values by a linear regression equation line results in a reasonable estimate of streamflow. This method's most promising application is in the monitoring of small basins where much of the annual discharge occurs during the spring melt. Given the occurrence of rapid changes in discharge in these basins due to both diurnal variations in snowmelt and changing runoff source area, and the excessive manpower required to carry out a sufficient number of current meterings needed to properly observe this changing discharge, the dye dilution method often provides a more accurate estimate of discharge.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic Antarctic and Alpine ResearchSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207