Estimating Flow, Hydraulic Geometry, and Hydrokinetic Power at Ungauged Locations in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A resource assessment of the hydrokinetic potential in Canada's rivers was completed. The main objectives of the study were to (1) quantify the potential hydrokinetic energy avail- able for development both nationally and regionally, and (2) develop geospatial datasets identifying streams or areas of high hydrokinetic potential. Flow estimates at ungauged locations were found using multiple linear regression coupled with Canonical correlation analysis (MLR-CCA). Total theoretical hydro power, equivalent to total theoretical hydroki- netic power was calculated using these ow estimates and hydraulic head estimates from DEMs. It is estimated that there are 710 GW of potential power in Canadian rivers, with 97.5% con dence that there is at least 433 GW. Downstream hydraulic geometry (DHG) relations were applied to ow estimates to nd cross section velocity and power at ungauged locations. Further testing was done on DHG relations, and were found to be most accurate when characterized by soil drainage characteristics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".