Boreal forest disturbance and streamflow response, northeastern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of forest disturbance on streamflow from small (<10 km2) basins have been well documented; however, implications of such disturbance for streamflow from relatively large rivers in the Canadian boreal forest are unclear. Landsat imagery was used to determine changes in the type, amount, and location of forest disturbance in northeastern Ontario between 1985 and 1990. These were compared with streamflow responses from medium- and large-scale basins in the region. Harvesting dominated forest disturbance, and total disturbance as of 1990 ranged from 25% of basin area in the northwest part of the region to 5% in the southeast. There was limited streamflow response to land cover changes, with no definitive changes in water year runoff or peak flow magnitude and timing. This likely reflects the ability of relatively large basins to buffer the hydrologic impacts of the small degree of recent forest disturbance, combined with the influence of climatic variability on temporal trends in basin streamflow. However, disturbance was associated with increases in moderate and low flows from medium and large basins, respectively, which occurred largely during summer months.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".