MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337166301 · doi:10.4095/214216

Vulnérabilité à la nappe des aquifères fracturés du sud-ouest du Québec : évaluation par les méthodes DRASTIC et GOD

2003· report· en· W2337166301 on OpenAlexaffabout
V Murat, Daniel Paradis, Martine M. Savard, Miroslav Nastev, É Bourque, A Hamel, R Lefebvre, R Martel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents an assessment of the vulnerability of regional aquifers as part of the Geological Survey of Canada project of characterization of fractured-rock aquifers in southwestern Quebec. Vulnerability assessment uses the physical properties of the setting to evaluate the sensitivity of groundwater to all types of pollutants introduced from the ground surface. Two methods, DRASTIC and GOD, were used for comparison purposes. Results indicate that the DRASTIC method yields a more detailed assessment. This method shows the higher vulnerability areas as coinciding with recharge zones in the northern, northwestern and southeastern parts of the study area, with the lower vulnerability areas located where clay cover is significant. When theGODmethod is used, the entire study area appears to have moderate vulnerability, which is not an adequate representation of the region.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207