MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334476088 · doi:10.2166/wqrjc.2012.143

Plunging inflows and the summer photic zone in reservoirs

2012· article· en· W2334476088 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Roger Pieters, Gregory A. Lawrence

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesBC Hydro
KeywordsPhotic zoneInflowOutflowGeologyOceanographyUpwellingEntrainment (biomusicology)Environmental scienceNutrientPhytoplankton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kinbasket and Revelstoke Reservoirs are part of the Columbia River system in eastern British Columbia, Canada. Hydroelectricity from these large reservoirs represents about 30% of the province's generation capacity. Of interest to water use planning is the effect of reservoir operation on pelagic productivity. We address one small part of this question, namely, the supply of nutrients carried by inflows that plunge below the photic zone during the summer. Using an idealized water balance for the photic zone, three cases are considered: (1) a shallow outlet, (2) a deep outlet, and (3) no outflow. For a shallow outlet, all inflow that plunges below the photic zone is upwelled into the photic zone on its way to the outlet. For a deep outlet, inflow that plunges below the photic zone will short circuit or pass directly to the outlet unless entrainment generates upwelling of the inflow into the photic zone. For a reservoir with no outflow, such as a reservoir that is filling, inflow that plunges below the photic zone remains at depth unless either entrainment or a bathymetric effect generates flow into the photic zone; nutrients are then released when the reservoir is drawn down, often in winter.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.271 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207