Instream ecological flow and reservoir ecological operation in the upper reaches of Irtysh River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Instream ecological flow (IEF) and flow-related variations were important for healthy river systems. However, water conservancy projects such as reservoirs altered the processes of IEF and thereby posed considerable threat to the health of river systems and aquatic lives. To that end, in this study the effects of reservoir construction on IEF in the upper reaches of the Irtysh River were analyzed using an improved hydrological method. The computed results were in turn used to determine the maximum (MaxIEF), minimum (MinIEF) and optimal (OptIEF) instream ecological flows of the river. Based on the study, reservoir impoundments limited IEF in wet seasons but enhanced it in dry seasons. It also narrowed suitable flow range for reproduction and growth of aquatic life. Reservoirs could be used to regulate Irtysh River discharge. For healthy instream processes in wet years, OptIEF could be set as the lower limit and MaxIEF as the upper limit. For much the same reasons, MinIEF could be set as the lower limit in dry years and OptIEF as a suitable target in normal years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".