MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193122844 · doi:10.1002/hyp.14342

Subsurface hydrology of tile‐drained headwater catchments: Compatibility of concepts and hydrochemistry

2021· article· en· W3193122844 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dale R. Van Stempvoort, D. Ross MacKay, Geoff Koehler, Pamela Collins, Susan J. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsBaseflowHydrology (agriculture)GroundwaterSubsurface flowSTREAMSWater tableEnvironmental scienceMODFLOWAquiferSurface waterGeologyDominance (genetics)StreamflowGroundwater flowDrainage basinEnvironmental engineeringGeographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Concepts and terms used in previous multidisciplinary studies of tile‐drained aquitard‐dominated catchments (TDADC) are inconsistent and confusing. We provide a well‐defined, comprehensive conceptual model of the subsurface hydrology of TDADC by selecting seven mutually compatible and consistent concepts. These concepts are: (1) groundwater as the main source of baseflow in headwater streams, (2) dominance of ‘pre‐event’ water in stormflow, (3) importance of both macropores and matrix, (4) changes in flowpaths with rate of stream discharge, (5) dominance of shallow, lateral subsurface flow, (6) interactive nature of subsurface water, (7) transpiration of groundwater. This conceptual model was successfully ‘field‐tested’ by examining data collected in a TDADC in a rural area of southern Ontario, Canada. The data consist mainly of chemical and isotopes tracers in water samples (headwater streams, groundwater, precipitation, tile water, soil‐surface water), supplemented by water levels and meteorological data.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207