Evaluation of Methods and Results in the Braddock Bay Wetland Restoration Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prior to restoration, Braddock Bay was an open embayment wetland on the southern coast of Lake Ontario, and it is part of the Rochester Embayment Great Lakes Area of Concern (AoC). Braddock Bay was partially protected by two spits that are remnants of the protective barrier beach that has slowly been eroded over time. Without the barrier to protect the shoreline within the bay, the coastal wetland was severely impacted by wave action from Lake Ontario, leading to loss of 43 hectares of wetland. The erosion of the barrier was facilitated by water-level regulations implemented in the late 1950s. A further consequence of water-level regulation was the loss of diversity, as the lack of periodic low water levels resulted in a cattail monoculture and the loss of sedge/grass meadow habitat. Braddock Bay is being restored by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The plan called for the following: restoration of a portion of existing cattail-dominated wetland by cutting cattails in August (when storage carbohydrates in rhizomes are minimized) and herbicide treatment of new stems; channeling and potholing to improve wildlife access to the wetland; the re-creation of the historical barrier beach using rubble-mound and sand; and the creation of spoil mounds along the channels and potholes to increase the elevation in these areas and discourage the growth of cattail while supporting the growth of sedge/grass meadow species. Two years of data collection were performed following construction activities in 2016. Preliminary surveys showed an increase in an invasive species of concern (purple loosestrife) from year 1 to year 2 across the restoration site. A decrease in cattail across the years was observed in the cattail treatment areas, along with a slight decrease of Typha found in the sedge/grass meadow and spoil mound habitats. Based on this monitoring, construction standards set for the restoration must be met, and adaptive management must occur throughout the project timeline for restorations to succeed. Site-level weighted mean C metrics are recommended for future floristic analyses based on an observed species richness influence on FQAI.
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 | 0.024 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".