MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396959027 · doi:10.1061/9780784485477.077

Using a Gravel Quarry for Raw Water Storage: A Water Quality Modeling Case Study of the Rock Hill Quarry Reservoir

2024· article· en· W4396959027 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Witt, Vanessa Martinez, Dendy Lofton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyMining engineeringWater qualityWater storagePetroleum engineeringGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To help improve the drought-resiliency of its potable water system, the Athens-Clarke County (ACC) Public Utilities Department (PUD) is evaluating the feasibility of using the Rock Hill Quarry (RHQ) as a future raw water storage reservoir. The quarry reservoir would store nearly 5 billion gallons of water from a local river, and supply the water as needed to the ACC PUD distribution system. To support a feasibility assessment and evaluation of water treatment options, a reservoir hydrodynamic and water quality model of the quarry was developed in CE-QUAL-W2 to simulate reservoir operations and water quality dynamics over a 10-year period for two reservoir storage sizes. In-reservoir water quality dynamics and the range of water quality constituent parameter values in water withdrawn from the multi-level outlet system were quantified. Model results indicated seasonal anoxia may form near reservoir bed sediments at relatively smaller storage levels due to thermal stratification, but this phenomenon is not observed at relatively larger storage levels. The range of modeled water quality constituent concentrations within the reservoir and in adit withdrawals was generally within primary and secondary maximum contaminant levels for public water supplies.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics→French-language works237,207→