Hydrostratigraphy of the Paris Moraine in the Guelph Area, Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many growing southern Ontario communities, including Guelph, rely on fractured bedrock aquifers for drinking water. Contamination and overexploitation pose a threat to these water resources, necessitating characterization of vulnerability, risks, and recharge areas. Quaternary sediments southeast of the City of Guelph, including the Paris Moraine, were investigated in order to delineate hydrostratigraphy. This was achieved through study of 9 cored-holes, as well as existing MOE, GRCA, and University of Guelph data. Falling head permeameter measurements and empirical grain-size distribution measurements and analysis were employed for determination of 𝐾𝑠𝑎𝑡 values, which were used to construct a hydrostratigraphy. Of 19 methods evaluated, The Kozeny-Carman empirical grain-size method for determining 𝐾𝑠𝑎𝑡 was found to be more representative of measured values for the study area. The area is dominated by a conductivity regime of 2.72x10-7 – 1.40x10-6 m/s with local heterogeneity present on the scale of 10’s to 100’s of meters. The Paris Moraine, particularly its backslope, is at higher risk due to its relatively high conductivity, greater occurrence of aquifer units, as well as prevalence of small-scale topographic (hummocky topography), and bedrock topographic lows.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".