MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200248741 · doi:10.3390/w13243487

Impacts of Agricultural Areas on Spatio-Temporal Variability of Daily Minimum Extreme Flows during the Transitional Seasons (Spring and Fall) in Southern Quebec

2021· article· en· W4200248741 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ali A. Assani, Ayoub Zeroual, Alexandre Roy, Christophe Kinnard

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShoreSpring (device)GeographyHydrology (agriculture)Spatial variabilityAgriculturePhysical geographyEnvironmental scienceClimatologyOceanographyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several statistical methods were used to analyze the spatio-temporal variability of daily minimum extreme flows (DMEF) in 17 watersheds—divided into three homogenous hydroclimatic regions of southern Quebec—during the transitional seasons (spring and fall), during the 1930–2019 period. Regarding spatial variability, there was a clear difference between the south and north shores of the St. Lawrence River, south of 47° N. DMEF were lower in the more agricultural watersheds on the south shore during transitional seasons compared to those on the north shore. A correlation analysis showed that this difference in flows was mainly due to more agricultural areas ((larger area (>20%) on the south than on the north shore (<5%)). An analysis of the long-term trend of these flows showed that the DMEF of south-shore rivers have increased significantly since the 1960s, during the fall (October to December), due to an increase in rainfall and a reduction in cultivated land, which increased the infiltration in the region. Although there was little difference between the two shores in the spring (April to June), we observed a decrease in minimum extreme flows in half (50%) of the south-shore rivers located north of 47° N.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.180 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207