MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889716593 · doi:10.25976/1d9y-0a25

Petitcodiac Watershed Water Quality Monitoring

2025· dataset· en· W6889716593 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDataStream · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater qualityWatershedRiparian zoneWatershed managementWater pollutionTotal maximum daily loadSampling (signal processing)Hydrology (agriculture)Pollution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1999, the Petitcodiac Watershed Alliance (PWA) has been sampling water to monitor various water quality parameters throughout the Petitcodiac Watershed to gauge the health of our local ecosystem. The objective of our long-term water quality monitoring remains to identify sources of water pollution to help us and our stakeholders improve water quality within the Petitcodiac and Memramcook River watersheds. To fulfill this objective, we collect annual data at 20 long-term monitoring sites once a month from May to October on the following parameters: dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductivity, total dissolved solids, salinity, water temperature, turbidity, total coliforms, Escherichia coli (E.coli), nitrates and phosphates. Results are compared to relevant water quality guidelines and past data to infer trends in water quality measurements, which allows us to speculate on the potential causes for each parameter’s fluctuations and relationships, and prepare remedial plans when necessary. The PWA engages with community members to improve riparian buffer zones in urban and rural areas and promote best management practices related to watershed management. This program would not be possible without our key funder, the New Brunswick Environmental Trust Fund, and other important funders such as the Government of Canada and RBC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDataStreamSame topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207