MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391881092 · doi:10.1111/jfr3.12971

Spatiotemporal variability of fall daily maximum flows in southern Quebec (Canada) from 1930 to 2018

2024· article· en· W4391881092 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ali A. Assani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Flood Risk Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShorePrecipitationEnvironmental scienceWetlandSurface runoffHydrology (agriculture)Infiltration (HVAC)AgricultureClimatologyPhysical geographyGeographyOceanographyMeteorologyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Quebec is experiencing a significant increase in summer and fall temperatures and rainfall. This study compares the spatiotemporal variability of maximum daily flows generated by rainfall during the fall season (September–December) in relation to this climatic change and physiographic and land use factors. Analysis of the spatial variability of these maximum flows measured from 1930 to 2018 in 17 watersheds revealed that the magnitude of flows is approximately twice as low on the north shore as it is on the south shore south of 47° N. This difference is explained by three main factors: wetlands (negative correlation) and agricultural (positive correlation) surface area, and summer–fall total precipitation (positive correlation). As for the temporal variability of flows, the different Mann–Kendall statistical tests showed a significant increase in flows due to increased rainfall. The increase of flows was more widespread on the north shore than on the south because the storage capacity of wetlands and other water bodies does not change over time to store excess rainfall. On the south shore, the increase in flows over time is limited due to the significant reduction in agricultural areas since the modernization of agriculture. This reduction favored infiltration to the detriment of runoff.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Flood Risk ManagementSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207