MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281969797 · doi:10.3390/w14111716

Wastewater System Inflow/Infiltration and Residential Pluvial Flood Damage Mitigation in Canada

2022· article· en· W4281969797 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dan Sandink, Barbara Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPluvialFlood mythStormwaterEnvironmental scienceCombined sewerFlood mitigationEnvironmental planningFlooding (psychology)WastewaterClimate changeWater resource managementEnvironmental engineeringGeographySurface runoffGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pluvial flooding in urban areas is one of the most significant drivers of disaster loss in Canada. Damages during pluvial flood events are associated with overwhelmed urban drainage (stormwater and wastewater) systems. During the period from 2013 to 2021, Canadian property and casualty insurers reported approximately CAD 2 billion in personal property (residential) pluvial sewer backup claims during flood catastrophes. There has been growing interest in managing pluvial urban flood risk, notably through newly funded national programs focused on climate change adaptation. These programs have included the development of new guidelines and standards focused on managing the underlying factors contributing to urban and basement flooding. Inflow and infiltration (I/I) has received limited attention in the pluvial flood literature, however. Informed by significant engagement with practitioners in Canada, this paper provides a review of the issue of I/I into wastewater systems and its relation to pluvial flooding. The paper will address concerns related to private property engagement in I/I and urban pluvial flood reduction programs. Both improved technical standards and administrative support are needed to ensure that wastewater infrastructure is less susceptible to I/I over its lifecycle.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207