A New Field Guide For Freshwater Shoreline Response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) has developed a series of field guides to provide technical support tools for decisions regarding the evaluation of freshwater and marine shorelines and treatment options during an oil spill response. The new Freshwater Shoreline Response Guide is aligned with and complements the most recent editions of the ECCC Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Technique (SCAT) Manual (ECCC, 2018) and the ECCC Field Guide to Oil Spill Response on Marine Shorelines (ECCC, 2016). ECCC is engaged to provide science-based information to the spill response community and develop an expertise in spill response. The purpose of the Freshwater Shoreline Response Field Guide is to provide advice and guidance on the protection and treatment of freshwater shorelines threatened or affected by an oil spill. This Field Guide focuses on conventional tactics normally available to responders and appropriate for freshwater shoreline environments. The content of the Field Guide is organized to describe key elements of: Health and safety for field teamsNet Environmental Benefit Analysis (NEBA) / Spill Impact Mitigation Assessment (SIMA)Freshwater environmentsOil fate and behaviour in freshwater environmentsResponse – planning, treatment, special topics, and completion and monitoring
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.128 | 0.091 |
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".