Bibliographic record
Abstract
This issue contains the second set of 10 articles arising from the Hamilton Harbour Remedial Action Plan, a companion to the 12 articles which were published earlier in this journal (AEHMS, 2016).Hamilton Harbour (Figure 1) is a chronically eutrophic embayment located at the western end of Lake Ontario that has experienced many decades of agricultural, industrial and urban contamination. The harbour has been identified as one of the 43 Areas of Concern in 1987 under the terms of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between Canada and the United States (IJC, 1987). This classification required the development and implementation of a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) which has been thoroughly described by Hall et al. (2006). The Hamilton Harbour RAP serves as a unique example for integrating science, public input and management practices (Hall and O'Connor, 2016).The two special issues were organized by a committee of senior experts (J. Hall, D. Boyd, M. Koops, C. Marvin and K. Minns) with long-term experience with Hamilton Harbour and its watershed. The Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management Society (AEHMS) actively co-sponsored the organization and development of the two special issues. The first call for papers for this special issue was made in the summer of 2014, inviting abstracts from potential contributors. After initial screening, an author's workshop was convened in the fall of 2014 where contributors were asked to make a 15 minute presentation highlighting the content of their proposal. Selected papers were invited for submission by the spring of 2015. Subsequently, these manuscripts were subjected to standard peer review, author's revisions and technical-linguistic editing by the AEHMS.This second special issue on Hamilton Harbour contains 10 articles which have been arranged under two broad categories, namely Biotic Ecology and Ecosystem Management. The first section provides new and detailed information about various trophic levels including microbial communities, phytoplankton, zooplankton and fish. The second section focuses on diverse management aspects dealing with beaches, terns, and sediment quality. One of the articles explores the impact of Randle Reef sediment remediation on the recovery of Hamilton harbour.The support of the Hamilton Harbour Remedial Action Plan Office is sincerely acknowledged. Special thanks are due to John Hall, with best wishes for his retirement, and also to Kristin O'Connor. We also thank the expert committee for their advice concerning the development of this special issue. We are grateful to Rimi Kalinuaskas and Kristin Geater of Environment Canada for the financial support of this publication. The assistance of Jennifer Lorimer, Susan Blunt, Lisa Elder, Robin Rozon and Mark Fitzpatrick in the development of this issue is gratefully acknowledged.
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.359 | 0.235 |
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".