MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2784016832 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2017-0330

Characterizing and modelling the trapping efficiency of sedimentation basins downstream of harvested peat bog

2018· article· en· W2784016832 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Myriam Samson-Dô, André St‐Hilaire

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPeatHydrology (agriculture)Structural basinWatershedSedimentationDrainage basinEnvironmental scienceSedimentWater tableBogGeologyGeomorphologyGroundwaterEcologyGeographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peat moss harvesting is an important industry in Canada. To harvest peat, the water table of the peatland must be lowered to allow the surficial peat layer to dry and be harvested. Drainage water can contain suspended sediments, so at most harvesting sites, the water is routed through sedimentation basins. This work focuses on characterizing and modelling their trapping efficiency. Eight basins with different volume/watershed area ratios (705 to 4170 m3/km2) were studied in three Quebec regions. Suspended sediment concentration and discharge were monitored up- and downstream of each basin during the ice-free season. Basins with high ratios of volume/drainage area, multiple basin configurations (i.e., two basins in series or in parallel), and those equipped with a flow regulation structure were more efficient than regular basins. Moreover, the nature of sediments (size, decomposition level, and organic content) influences loads, but not the trapping efficiency. Finally, two empirical models developed to predict trapping efficiency of municipal sedimentation basins were tested and adapted for basins that capture peat sediments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→