MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4398176353 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4439142/v1

Causal discovery of hydroclimatic drivers influencing water quality in a large lake

2024· preprint· en· W4398176353 on OpenAlexaff
Rohit Shukla, Leon Boegman, Pankaj Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Environmental scienceWater qualityClimatologyGeologyEcologyBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Harmful algal blooms (HABs) are a threat to ecosystem services, with adverse economic and public health impacts. Large-scale climate processes will influence local environmental conditions, potentially favoring HAB formation through complex, nonlinear interactions. This study employs explainable (i.e., SHAP) machine learning to give insight on the predictions and causal analysis (i.e., PCMCI) to identify the relationships between climate indices, physical drivers, and the resultant Chlorophyll-a (CHL) concentrations in western Lake Erie. Our causal analysis revealed that runoff and water temperature directly affect CHL but also act to mediate the impacts of the Arctic Oscillation on influencing CHL. Moreover, our explainable analysis further confirmed this by identifying runoff as the main driving factor, followed by water temperature. The study highlights that water quality in the basin is subject to confounding effects resulting from interactions between global atmospheric circulation patterns and local hydro-meteorological factors, expanding HAB forecasting beyond synoptic scale meteorology.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 venueResearch Square→Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→