MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342158630 · doi:10.3390/w8040158

Quantifying Spatial Changes in the Structure of Water Quality Constituents in a Large Prairie River within Two Frameworks of a Water Quality Model

2016· article· en· W2342158630 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nasim Hosseini, Kwok Pan Chun, Karl‐Erich Lindenschmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWater qualityHydrology (agriculture)River ecosystemPhytoplanktonNutrientEcosystemEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A global sensitivity analysis was carried out on a water quality model to quantify the spatial changes in parameter sensitivity of a model of a large prairie river, the South Saskatchewan River (SSR). The method is used to assess the relative impacts of major nutrient loading sources and a reservoir on the river’s water quality. The river completely freezes over during winter; hence, the sensitivity analysis was carried out seasonally, for winter and summer, to account for the influence of ice-covered conditions on nutrient transformations. Furthermore, the integrity of the river’s aquatic ecosystem was examined through the inter-relationship between variables and comparing hierarchy index values and water quality indices at four locations along the river. Sensitivities of model parameters varied slightly at different locations along the river, with the phytoplankton growth rate being the most influential parameter. Nitrogen and phosphorus transformation processes were more sensitive in winter, while chlorophyll-a and dissolved oxygen parameters showed higher sensitivity in summer. A more complicated correlation between variables was observed downstream of the junction of the Red Deer River. Our results reveal that the lower correlation between variables may suggest a more balanced and healthier system, although further analysis is needed to support this statement.

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)0.003
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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207