Water Quality and Flow Management Scenarios in the Qu’Appelle River–Reservoir System Using Loosely Coupled WASP and CE-QUAL-W2 Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The water bodies of the Saskatchewan Prairies suffer multiple stressors, and demand for water is expected to increase. Water quality models can help evaluate water management strategies and risks such as climate change. This study assesses the impact of interbasin water transfers on the water quality of a strategic, eutrophic prairie reservoir that receives poor-quality watershed run-off. A one-dimensional WASP model was used to estimate nutrient transformations in the transfers along a 97 km river channel. The WASP model was then loosely coupled to a two-dimensional CE-QUAL-W2 model of the downstream receiving reservoir. Output from the WASP model was manually transformed into boundary conditions for the CE-QUAL-W2 reservoir model. This method improves on an earlier attempt to estimate nutrient transformations in the transfers using linear regression. Results from the loosely coupled models suggest Buffalo Pound Lake would respond well to the interbasin transfers. The number of threshold exceedances decreased for all modeled water quality variables. Nutrient concentrations were most influenced in the open water season following spring freshet. Any additional reduction of threshold exceedances during winter was minimal in comparison. These results are interesting from a management perspective as increased transfers under winter operations risk ice damage to the river channel.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".