Twenty-year Performance Evaluation of Grass Swale and Perforated Pipe Drainage Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Twenty-year Performance Evaluation of Grass Swale and Perforated Pipe Drainage SystemsThree sewersheds in Ottawa, Canada, consisting of two grass swale and perforated pipe (GSPP) drainage systems and one conventional curb and gutter drainage system were studied to compare the performance of GSPP systems to the conventional drainage systems. The research was conducted by J.F. Sabourin in 1991/92, with follow-up studies in 1998 and 2006 by J.F. Sabourin and Associates Inc. (JFSA)....Author(s)Jean-François SabourinHeather C. WilsonSourceProceedings of the Water Environment FederationSubjectSession 90: Sustainable Solutions to Stormwater Issues Through Green InfrastructureDocument typeConference PaperPublisherWater Environment FederationPrint publication date Jan, 2011ISSN1938-6478SICI1938-6478(20110101)2011:10L.6035;1-DOI10.2175/193864711802766254Volume / Issue2011 / 10Content sourceWEFTECFirst / last page(s)6035 - 6059Copyright2011Word count159Subject keywordsstormwater managementgrass swaleperforated pipedrainage systemsperformance evaluation
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".