MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237028818 · doi:10.4324/9780429504181-4

Implementing integrated water management: illustrations from the Grand River watershed

2018· book-chapter· en· W4237028818 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara Veale, Sandra Cooke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWater Governance and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater resource managementHydrology (agriculture)WatershedEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Grand River watershed is the largest in southern Ontario. Poor water quality, floods and drought experienced in the 1930s prompted the formation of the Grand River Conservation Authority. While significant water improvements have been achieved, the Grand River faces chronic stress from the impacts of rapid population growth, land use intensification and changing climate. There is renewed commitment to address evolving water issues through integrated watershed management. This article summarizes the lessons learnt in the Grand River watershed and contends that integrated watershed management, although difficult to implement, provides a useful framework for practical application and positive results.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.290
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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0530.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Governance and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207