MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302958509 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.r225-17

Hydraulic Changes to Stormwater Flow Through Wetlands

2006· article· en· W2302958509 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David A. Stern

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandStormwaterEnvironmental scienceStormwater managementHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementKey (lock)Flow (mathematics)Surface runoffEcologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wetlands have been increasingly identified as important in ameliorating the impacts of stormwater flow. Key to understanding the attributes of wetlands is determining the behaviour of flow through wetlands. This report presents the average flow velocities for two wetland types (scrub-shrub and emergent) found within a natural wetland through the use of dye tracer tests. The study area was divided into wetland segments using the US Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetland Inventory (NWI) classification scheme and mapped using a Global Positioning System (GPS). During different flow levels, dye was pumped into the headwaters of the wetland. The dye was collected with auto-samplers at several sampling stations located at the transition zones between wetland segments. Results indicate that there is a significant difference in the flow characteristics between scrub-shrub and emergent wetland types. Differences were also found between leaf-on and leaf-off seasons. High data variability was found for samples collected furthest from the dye injection point. The range of velocities observed for scrub-shrub classified segment during the leaf-on season was from 1.11 to 23.08 m/min. For the emergent classified segment, the range of velocities was from 1.54 to 7.68 m/min. Differences in the velocities between the two types of wetlands could be attributed to the sinuosity of the stream channels and the vegetation in the floodplain that is associated with each type of

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207