MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2307907401 · doi:10.5558/tfc2016-007

Al-Pac Catchment Experiment (ACE)

2016· article· en· W2307907401 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Margaret Donnelly, K. J. Devito, C. A. Mendoza, Richard M. Petrone, Mark Spafford

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Pacific Forest Industries
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSyncrude
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceEvapotranspirationDrainage basinGroundwaterWater storageCatchment hydrologyBorealGroundwater flowGeologyAquiferGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Al-Pac Catchment Experiment (ACE) was initiated in 2005 to examine the influence of aspen harvest and linear disturbances on water and energy movement in Boreal Plain (BP) ecosystems. A paired, pre- and post- harvest experiment in aspen-dominated stands was conducted on two meso-scale (10–20 km2) stream catchments with a range of surficial geology and low relief. Comparing flow two years pre-harvest and three years post-harvest indicated no observable differences in low and high flow discharge or geochemistry concentrations between reference and harvested catchment outflows. Reduced evapotranspiration in harvested relative to references catchments was short lived. Soil and groundwater storage buffered the impacts of harvesting on catchment stream flow and large time lags of up to four years were observed in initial response. Due to the low relief, deep and variable surficial geology and storage potential interacting with seasonal and decadal wet and dry patterns, measures of changes in (and indices of) soil moisture or groundwater recharge and storage are more meaningful than stream flow in assessing hydrologic recovery following harvesting. This study has been incorporated into hydrogeological framework to develop effective planning tools that can be used to maximize harvesting and hauling efficiencies.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207