MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398219292 · doi:10.24908/ohi.v2i1.17564

Floating Wetland Project: A One Health Action Addressing Agricultural Nutrient Runoff in Niagara-on-the-Lake

2024· article· en· W4398219292 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathleen Gardner, Ashley Khan, Parth Khatana, Clara Murray, Caitlin Remus, Maddie Troisi

Bibliographic record

VenueOne Health Innovation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandSurface runoffNutrientEnvironmental scienceAgricultureWater resource managementHydrology (agriculture)Environmental planningGeographyEcologyEngineeringArchaeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nutrient loading refers to the process whereby excess nutrients, such as phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N), enter bodies of water and deposit within the sediment. Nutrient loading commonly occurs as a result of human-generated changes to land cover causing an increase in nutrient availability. Agricultural runoff presents one of the largest contributors to nutrient loading, especially within Southern Ontario, Canada. Because higher than normal levels of N and P within bodies of water can affect the health of humans, non-human animals, and the environment, a One Health approach is needed to address the issue of agricultural nutrient loading. This article outlines a cost-effective, grassroots action designed to reduce excess nutrient levels within the Niagara River. It involves introducing floating wetlands to filter excess agricultural nutrients and improve water quality, generating healthier conditions for humans, non-human animals, and the environment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOne Health InnovationSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207