MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188720412 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2009.010

Developing Capacity for Large-Scale Rainwater Harvesting in Canada

2009· article· en· W2188720412 on OpenAlexaffabout
Khosrow Farahbakhsh, Christopher Despins, Chantelle Leidl

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersTexas Water Development Board
KeywordsRainwater harvestingImpervious surfaceStormwaterEnvironmental planningSurface runoffScale (ratio)BusinessEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rainwater harvesting (RWH) is the ancient practice of capturing rainwater from impervious surfaces and storing it for future use. Harvesting roof runoff for domestic purposes has historically been prevalent in rural areas of Canada and the practice is currently experiencing revived interest and uptake in the urban environment. When implemented on a wide scale, RWH can contribute to both stormwater abatement and water conservation, serving to relieve pressure on existing infrastructure and potentially delay the need for infrastructure expansion. While such benefits are known, there remain several barriers that impede widespread implementation. These include cost, liability concerns, and a lack of clear policy for RWH. This paper outlines the benefits of RWH and describes findings of recent research that has attempted to develop some of the technical, administrative, and market capacity needed to overcome these barriers, focussing on water quality, design practices, economic analysis, and policy development.

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)0.008
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations24
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207