MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2330710805 · doi:10.1061/40517(2000)182

Prediction of Downstream Water Quality Impacts of Devils Lake Pumped Outflows Using HEC-5Q

2000· article· en· W2330710805 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel J. Reinartz, James D. Sentz, Terry R. Zien, Dennis D. Holme

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Army Corps of EngineersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsHydrology (agriculture)Salt lakeEnvironmental scienceFlooding (psychology)Flood mythWater qualityElevation (ballistics)GeologyCurrent (fluid)Water levelOceanographyArchaeologyGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1992 Devils Lake, a terminal lake in North Dakota, has risen nearly 7.6 meters (25 feet), flooding an additional 362 square kilometers (sq. km.) (140 square miles (sq. mi.)). In July 1999, the lake reached a peak elevation of 441.11 meters (1447.2 feet) above mean sea level, with a corresponding surface area of 518 sq. km. (200 sq. mi.). Like the Great Salt Lake in Utah, Devils Lake is highly saline due to the long-term accumulation of salts from evaporation. To alleviate flood impacts on surrounding communities, the St. Paul District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is investigating the feasibility and environmental impacts of pumping saline water from the lake into the fresher Sheyenne River water. The Sheyenne River flows through Lake Ashtabula, a Corps of Engineers reservoir, and into the Red River of the North, which then flows north to Lake Winnipeg in Canada, thereby creating interstate and international concerns. The Hydrologic Engineering Center's HEC-5Q program is used to address downstream water quality impacts. By simulating with- and without-pumping scenarios on the Sheyenne and Red Rivers, a quantitative evaluation of the effects can be made, including alternative operating plans for the outlet and operation of Lake Ashtabula. Vast amounts of data are conveniently handled by the HEC's Data Storage System (HECDSS). HECDSS is used to preprocess the data for input to HEC-5Q and to post-process the data from HEC-5Q for analysis.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→