Case study analysis on the impacts of surface water allocations for hydraulic fracturing on surface water availability of the upper Athabasca River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Duvernay Formation of the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin underlies portions of the Upper Athabasca Watershed. To access unconventional shale resources in the Duvernay Formation, horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing were introduced to the area. Hydraulic fracturing requires large volumes of surface water for enhanced completions. This study examines the impacts of surface water allocations, as determined by the Alberta Desktop Method, on water availability of the Upper Athabasca Watershed, under the conditions of global climate change. Results of this study find most water allocations issued through temporary diversion licenses meet the constraints of the Alberta Desktop Method. The greatest risk for water imbalance scenarios occurs during winter months when historical surface water flows measure the lowest. Findings of this research will assist decision makers in understanding current and future water balance scenarios, and in determining appropriate and sustainable water management techniques for hydraulic fracturing operations throughout the Duvernay Formation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".