MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950687968 · doi:10.4138/atlgeol.2019.004

The geology and hydrogeology of springs on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia, Canada: an overview

2019· article· en· W2950687968 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Fred Baechler, Heather J. Cross, Lynn Baechler

Bibliographic record

VenueAtlantic Geology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicKarst Systems and Hydrogeology
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyKarstGroundwaterSpring (device)Hydrology (agriculture)HydrogeologyAlluviumGroundwater rechargeButteDebrisSTREAMSAquiferGeomorphologyGeochemistryOceanographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cape Breton Island springs have historically played a role in developing potable water supplies, enhancing salmonid streams, creating thin-skinned debris flows, as well as mineral and hydrocarbon exploration. Cape Breton Island provides a hydrogeological view into the roots of an ancient mountain range, now exhumed, deglaciated and tectonically inactive. Exhumation and glaciation over approximately 140 Ma since the Cretaceous are of particular relevance to spring formation. A total of 510 springs have been identified and discussed in terms of hydrological regions, flow, temperature, sphere of influence, total dissolved solids, pH and water typing. Examples are provided detailing characteristics of springs associated with faults, karst, salt diapirs, rockfall/alluvial systems and debris avalanche sites. Preliminary findings from a monitoring program of 27 springs are discussed. Future research should focus on identifying additional springs and characterizing associated groundwater dependent ecosystems. Incorporating springs into the provincial groundwater observation well monitoring program could facilitate early warning of drought conditions and other impacts associated with changing climate.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtlantic GeologySame topicKarst Systems and HydrogeologyFrench-language works237,207