MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3130961389 · doi:10.4095/327584

Archetypal Aquifer Project: consolidating 25 years of GSC groundwater work, Groundwater Geoscience Program 2019-2024

2021· report· en· W3130961389 on OpenAlexaffabout
H A J Russell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwaterAquiferGeologyWork (physics)Hydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceGeotechnical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glacial sedimentary aquifers are the most commonly exploited groundwater resource in Canada. To better understand regional groundwater supply issues the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) has been completing groundwater studies in glaciated terrains for over 25 years. It has predominantly focused work on 30 key Canadian aquifers. There is a need to consolidate and synthesis knowledge from numerous case studies and the broader literature within a framework. This project will address a classification for groundwater in glacial settings, consolidate data and knowledge for those settings, and collect new data as necessary. Analysis and modelling will enhance existing information in the published literature. To ensure the relevance and ability to support the broader Canadian groundwater community methods developments continues in a number of areas. Communication of results is critical and the project is embracing traditional avenues and also through participation in the Groundwater Project and contribution to international and provincial Webinars.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGroundwater flow and contamination studies→French-language works237,207→