Wetlands as integral parts of surface water–groundwater interactions in the Athabasca Oil Sands Area: Review and synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wetlands comprise unique water storage and conveyance mechanisms that maintain landscape integrity under the sub-humid climate in the Athabasca Oil Sands Area. In addition to their internal function, wetlands support a two-way hydrological connection to adjacent uplands and provide water for downstream water courses. Understanding the role of wetlands as integral parts of surface water (SW)–groundwater (GW) exchange can provide insights into the functioning of the hydrological system as a whole and contribute to thoughtful water management strategies and better coordination of monitoring efforts in the areas affected by oil sands (OS) activities. As such, this study summarizes the current state of hydrological knowledge on the role of wetlands in SW–GW interactions based on studies conducted within the Western Boreal Plains. In particular, the role of wetland soils and their properties in SW–GW interactions, the effects of wetlands on landscape hydrological connectivity and watershed runoff, and features of “wetland–aquifer” and “wetland–open waterbody” interactions were reviewed. Given that alterations of SW–GW interactions in wetlands can occur as a result of anthropogenic disturbances, the coordination of GW, SW, and wetland monitoring efforts and targeting areas where increased SW–GW exchange occurs would be beneficial for the economic and logistical efficiency of the OS monitoring network.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".