MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909046968 · doi:10.1080/07011784.2018.1554453

How appropriate are Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for protecting freshwater aquatic life from toxic chemicals in naturally-discharging groundwater?

2019· article· en· W2909046968 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
James W. Roy, Patricia L. Gillis, Lee Grapentine, Greg Bickerton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsWater qualityGroundwaterEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningAquatic ecosystemWater resource managementEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental chemistryEngineeringEcologyChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The natural flow of groundwater containing potentially-toxic chemicals into freshwater lakes, streams, and wetlands (Figure 1) is a common and well-documented problem (Conant et al., 2016). In Cana...

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207