MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388729121 · doi:10.1038/s41597-023-02732-9

Canada Source Watershed Polygons (Can-SWaP): A dataset for the protection of Canada’s municipal water supply

2023· article· en· W4388729121 on OpenAlexafffundabout
François‐Nicolas Robinne, Chloé Lamache, Dan K. Thompson, Jason A. Leach, Kevin D. Bladon

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaPacific Salmon FoundationOntario Forest Research InstituteCanadian Forest Service
FundersNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceIndigenous Services Canada
KeywordsSwap (finance)WatershedEnvironmental scienceWater supplySurface waterWater resource managementSTREAMSHydrology (agriculture)Environmental resource managementBusinessEnvironmental engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over 80% of municipal (i.e., excluding industrial and agricultural) water use in Canada comes from streams, lakes, and reservoirs. These freshwater bodies and their catchments require adequate protection to secure drinking water supply for Canadians. Canada, like most countries, lacks a consolidated national dataset of municipal catchments, arguably due to gaps in data availability. Against this backdrop, we present the Canada Source Watershed Polygons dataset, or Can-SWaP. Can-SWaP was created using point locations of more than 3,300 municipal water licences defining rights to surface water withdrawal. Where possible, the resulting 1,574 catchments were assessed for accuracy in spatial coverage against provincial and local datasets. Each watershed in Can-SWaP has an estimated water volume used for municipal water purposes derived from licencing data, and several variables from RiverATLAS for investigating the integrity of surface drinking water sources in Canada. Furthermore, basing our method on the HydroSHEDS suite of global products offers a robust framework for the production of other national datasets following an established international standard.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.197 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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 venueScientific DataSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207