MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158277704 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.7473

Using Thermal Profiling as an Indicator for Groundwater Discharge

2017· article· en· W3158277704 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jamie Ricci

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBedrockGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)Surface waterGeologyWetlandGroundwater dischargeSedimentEnvironmental scienceMarshBayPermafrostGroundwater flowOceanographyAquiferGeomorphologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temperature can be used in order to selectively and intelligently deploy monitoring wells to measure groundwater discharge to surface water. The temperature of Groundwater is constant, reflecting average annual temperature, whereas the temperature of surface water fluctuates daily and seasonally. The contrast can be found by scanning sediment for variations in temperature. In effect, this disparity causes ‘cold spots’ in surface water, such as lakes, which are often felt by swimmers as a brisk interruption to the warmth of the lake. This technique of scanning shorelines for evidence of groundwater discharge to surface water was employed at three locations. These sites are all located in Ontario; one, Victor, is in the James Bay Lowlands, while the remaining two, Frontenac Landfill and the Former Davis Tannery, are in southeastern Ontario, namely Kingston. Victor is a pristine location, while the two in Kingston are both contaminated. Each has limestone bedrock overlain by glacial sediment and wetlands. The two in southern Ontario have marshes, while the site in northern Ontario is a peatland. The climate of the Kingston locations is temperate and continental with influence of the Great Lakes whereas Victor is subarctic and wet. The stratigraphy, or succession of sediments that overly the bedrock, has been heavily disturbed by anthropogenic processes at the two sites in Kingston, making groundwater flow difficult to predict. Determining groundwater discharge will aid other work at each site. At the Former Davis Tannery it is critical to trace contaminants, particularly fugitive emissions that may discharge into adjacent surface water. At Frontenac, the study will help understand the implications of the landfill on the marsh which flanks it. Furthermore, the study of groundwater discharge at Victor can provide information about the hydrogeology of the region, as few studies have taken place in this region until recently. Two different types and probes of various lengths were manually inserted into sediment to identify temperature differences. Location and temperature readings were recorded. The range of temperatures at each site was as follows: Frontenac (10.2°C to 13.4°C), Victor (0.5°C to 20.4°C), and the Former Davis Tannery (8.2°C to 23.1°C). These differences indicate that thermal profiling can be used in order to scan for groundwater discharge. Furthermore, the ease with which this method can be accomplished makes it a viable solution for consulting firms, researchers, or others looking to characterize groundwater/surface water interactions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207