MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385282041 · doi:10.1080/07011784.2023.2234885

Assessing the effects of land cover change in runoff processes with RHESSys: a case study in the Waterford River Watershed, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

2023· article· en· W4385282041 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Bautista, Lakshman Galagedara

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatershedImpervious surfaceHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffLand useEnvironmental scienceLand coverGeographyDrainage basinForestryWater resource managementEcologyCartographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluating the current state of hydrologic processes in urban and semi-urban areas is an essential part of ensuring the sustainable management of water and preventing emergencies of extreme events. This study evaluated the effects of land use and land cover (LULC) change on runoff processes in the Waterford River Watershed (WRW), located in the eastern part of the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada. The Regional Hydro – Ecological Simulation System (RHESSys), a GIS-based hydro-ecological model, was used in a new urbanistic approach to simulate the effects of increasing impervious land as well as reducing urban green areas. The increase in hypothetical peak flows had a direct relationship with the reduction of pervious areas in the watershed. The most sizeable flow increases were observed in the periods of April to May and October to December. This study emphasizes the importance of using a prominent network of green and pervious structures or water retention areas when allocation for residential and commercial land increase.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207