MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911031755 · doi:10.4095/293152

Hydrogeology of the Chaudière River Watershed, Quebec

2013· report· en· W2911031755 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicolas Benoît, G Forest, Miroslav Nastev, Nadine Roy, Dana Blanchette, A Fréchette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrogeologyWatershedHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGeotechnical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Located south of Quebec City, the Chaudière River Watershed encompasses an area of 6700 km2, from the American border to the St. Lawrence River. It is mainly agricultural region where approximately 65% of the population relies on groundwater for its main source of water. The regional aquifer consists of fractured rocks of the Appalachian geological province and sparse coarse surficial sediments. This poster presents results of a regional hydrogeological study focusing on the development of a conceptual model for the regional groundwater flow. Estimated average recharge rates is 64 mm for fractured bedrock and 273 mm for coarse sediments. Over 600 measurements of groundwater levels show a close correlation with topography. The mean hydraulic conductivity of the bedrock is relatively low (K=1x10-7 m/s), suggesting mainly local groundwater flow. Chemical analyses of 155 groundwater samples show that groundwater is of good quality relative to the drinking water standards.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207