Assessment of the Local Impact of Retention Reservoirs—A Case Study of Jagodno (Existing) and Sarny (Planned) Reservoirs Located in Poland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The construction of retention reservoirs that cause permanent water damming is a complex subject and requires an interdisciplinary approach to environmental issues. The scope of the conducted study includes (1) a natural inventory of the area of Jagodno Reservoir in central Poland, which has been in operation for almost a decade, (2) a natural inventory of the area where a reservoir of similar size could potentially be built (Sarny, in southwestern Poland), (3) an assessment of the local community’s attitudes toward the operation or construction of individual facilities, (4) analysis and use of the obtained results to predict the local impact of Sarny Reservoir. The results of this study indicate areas where the impact of Jagodno Reservoir should be considered negative, neutral, or positive and what effect can be expected during the construction of Sarny Reservoir. One of the more significant results for Jagodno Reservoir, we should point out, is the appearance of a few waterfowl breeding at the site (4 species), a substantial expansion of the ichthyofauna population (from 9 to 24 species, which does not apply only to native species), a local loss of 91E0 habitat (willow riparian forests) and the appearance of one species of an invasive plant (Canadian goldenrod), a favorable impact on the water quality of the River Wiązownica (reduction in total and nitrate nitrogen loads by an average of 43.4% and 58.2%, respectively), and a positive assessment of the reservoir’s impact on the development of the region by the local community (19 out of 26 village leaders expressed positive opinions with no unambiguously negative votes).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".