Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Source Water Protection (SWP) Program, with the purpose of protecting the surface or groundwater that supplies municipal drinking water systems, has been managing the development of water resources numerical models at various conservation authorities (CAs). For the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLCOA), groundwater models have been developed to support work under Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (2001), the Clean Water Act (2006) and CLOCA's watershed management program. CLOCA analyzed each dataset and grid results for optimum use in source protection as well as other CA programs. The grid results were used to calculate water balance for various purposes such as watershed management planning, development plan reviews, and opportunities for low impact developments. Reverse particle tracking path lines provided information to identify the natural and ecological features that could potentially be impacted by proposed developments and/or land use changes. Other vital grids and theme maps utilized include, but are not limited to, groundwater discharge to streams, ecologically significant groundwater recharge areas and highly vulnerable aquifers. In the absence of wellhead protection areas (WHPA) within its jurisdiction, CLOCA has determined that the numerical model development instituted under the SWP Program has more utility for purposes beyond the initial objective of the program. The numerical model products serve as additional science-based planning tools that are defensible for CA to manage and protect the water resources within its watershed.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".