1961-2017 monthly potential groundwater recharge in southern Quebec database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This database contains the simulation of potential groundwater recharge (GWR) with a 500 m x 500 m resolution and a monthly time step over southern Quebec for the 1961-2017 period. These data were simulated using the HydroBudget model (HB; Dubois et al., 2021a, b) and are presented in Dubois et al. (2021c). The simulation was performed at UQAM by the team of Pr Marie Larocque’s research Chair on Water and land conservation (Chaire Eau et conservation du territoire), as part of a project funded by the Quebec Ministry of the Environment (Ministère de l’Environnement et de la Lutte contre les changements climatiques - MELCC). The study area is located in the Province of Quebec (humid and cold climate; Canada), between the St. Lawrence River and the Canada–USA border and between the Quebec–Ontario border and Quebec City (35 800 km2). The study area is divided into 140 656 cells of 500 m x 500 m. The simulation results are sorted in files by year that contains for each grid cell the monthly values of simulated vertical inflow (VI; sum of observed rainfall and simulated snowmelt – mm), average temperature (°C), simulated runoff (runoff + excess runoff – mm), simulated actual evapotranspiration (mm), and simulated potential GWR (mm).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".