MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414080518 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c562

Evaluating the Hydrological Performance of a Water Square with 2D Modeling and In Situ Monitoring

2025· article· en· W4414080518 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Juan Esteban Ossa Ossa, Sophie Duchesne, Geneviève Pelletier, Arman Rokhzadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMitacs
KeywordsSurface runoffStormwaterBioretentionHydrology (agriculture)Infiltration (HVAC)Combined sewerIn situFlood mythStorm Water Management ModelRetention basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In situ monitoring and numerical modeling tools are essential to quantify the advantages of stormwater management infrastructures and to improve their future designs. Such infrastructures offer effective solutions for decreasing runoff volume and mitigating surface sewer overflow issues in urban environments. This paper assesses the hydraulic and hydrologic performance of a stormwater management infrastructure using numerical modeling and in situ monitoring for a water square called Place des Fleurs-de-Macadam, located in a dense urban area in Montreal, Canada. This floodable park comprises a detention pond and bioretention cells that redirect and accumulate surface water from adjacent streets, enabling water infiltration and preventing excess water from surcharging the sewer system. The performance of the water square was evaluated with a coupled 1D/2D model in PCSWMM, as well as in situ monitoring, which was carried out by a flood test on site. The associated rainfall event was a three-hour rainfall of 62 mm, equivalent to a 100-year event for this area. Results obtained by numerical modeling and in situ monitoring indicated that urban stormwater runoff can be effectively mitigated. For the tested rainfall event, simulation and in situ monitoring results showed that the water square reduced the runoff volume by 98% and delayed outflows by two hours.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207