MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607314702 · doi:10.1061/jswbay.0000828

Hydrologic and Quality Control Performance of Zero-Exfiltration Pervious Concrete Pavement in Ontario

2017· article· en· W2607314702 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Adam J. Crookes, Jennifer Drake, Mark Green

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsCanadian Sleep SocietyUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPervious concreteEnvironmental scienceStormwaterWater qualityCombined sewerInfiltration (HVAC)Hydrology (agriculture)PollutantEnvironmental engineeringSurface runoffGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMeteorologyCementMaterials scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flooding and poor surface water quality are common issues in dense urban areas, and the challenge of managing stormwater requires a more effective approach. This study evaluates the hydrologic and water quality performance of a three year old, zero exfiltration pervious concrete parking lot in an urban area of St. Catharines, Ontario. Pervious concrete pavement exhibited a more naturalized hydrologic response compared with conventional asphalt, with volume reductions, and lag times to peak for every event observed, despite the zero exfiltration design preventing any infiltration into native soils. Residual concentrations in the pervious concrete effluent were below Provincial Water Quality Objectives and Canadian Water Quality Objectives for the majority of pollutants; however, high pH and elevated levels of aluminum and chromium were detected in the discharge. The site is well suited for further research, and long-term monitoring would help to evaluate the effectiveness of zero exfiltration systems in cold climates.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.201 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable Water in the Built EnvironmentSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207