MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239269788 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14653515

Evaluation of Lake Simcoe watershed rainfall characterisics

2021· preprint· en· W4239269788 on OpenAlexaff
Rabi C. Gautam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWatershedHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffWater yearGeographyDrainage basinGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority is monitoring the phosphorous loading in Lake Simcoe and to understand the changes in phosphorous loading due to runoff, it is prudent to characterize the rainfall data of the watershed contributing to Lake Simcoe. In this project, hourly and daily rainfall data from 13 different raingage statistics surrounding Lake Simcoe was analyzed to identify event, monthly, seasonal and annual statistics and their trend and thereby to identify the driest and wettest and average annual rainfall. After initial analysis, daily rainfall data from only 4 stations with consistent data for an approximate period of 20 years were chosen for further analysis. The results showed that hydrological year 1995-1996 was the wettest and hydrologic year 1991-1992 was the driest year. Similarly summer season and the month of June were the wettest and winter season and month of February were the driest for the watershed. No significant trend was observed in the yearly and monthly rainfall data while an increasing trend was observed at 3 stations for the winter season.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.257
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics→French-language works237,207→