MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2922086379 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2000.030

Winter Flow Dynamics of an On-Stream Stormwater Management Pond

2000· article· en· W2922086379 on OpenAlexaffabout
P. M. Marsalek, W. E. Watt, Jiří Maršálek, Bruce C. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStratification (seeds)Hydrology (agriculture)SedimentEnvironmental scienceGeologySnowmeltGeomorphologySnowGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The winter operation of an on-stream Stormwater management pond, located in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, was studied with respect to ice cover formation and breakup, density stratification, velocity field under the ice cover, and the risk of sediment washout The pond freezes over in late November, with the ice thickness reaching up to 0.5 m. During the first half of the winter period, the ice thickness was well described by Stefan’s formula with empirical coefficients appropriate for shallow water bodies. The pond was chemically stratified, with total dissolved solids concentrations up to 1200 mg L-1 observed close to the bottom. The meromictic stability of this stratification was calculated as 882 g . cm.cm-2. Measurements of the velocity field under the ice cover indicated a flow pattern comprising a fast flow region, a small dead zone and a large recirculation zone to the north and south of the fast flow trajectory, respectively. Such a pattern agreed well with that simulated by a CFD model (PHOENICS_). During a snowmelt event, the near-bottom velocities reached up to 0.05 m . S-1, but were not sufficient to scour the bottom sediment.

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 score0.064
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations26
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research Journal→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→