MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4383314885 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2023-0076

Ice accumulation at a water intake: a case study on the Mille-Iles River, Québec

2023· article· en· W4383314885 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Tadros Ghobrial, Amandine Pierre, Sean Boyd, Mark Loewen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité Laval
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Ice formationDeposition (geology)SupercoolingWater icePhysical geographyAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyGeographyGeologyGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringSedimentBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The blockage of water intakes by ice is recurrent in northern rivers during winter. Previous field studies have monitored field conditions leading to ice blockage and provided a review of mitigations methods. However, to improve the efficacy of these measures, the mechanisms that create the blockage need to be locally measured. For this purpose, a field campaign was implemented to monitor a water intake on the Mille-Iles River at Terrebonne, Quebec, during the winter of 2020–2021. Results from this study showed that ice accumulation on the trash rack had an average growth rate of 1.35 cm/h and reached a maximum thickness of 24 cm. The release rate of these trash rack accumulation events was on average 1.8 cm/h, which is 30% faster than the deposition rate. A minimum cumulative degree minutes of supercooling of 4.5 °C.min was required for the start of a trash-rack ice-accumulation event.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→