MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983489944

Modelling streamflow depletion under different groundwater pumping scenarios involving the Dalmeny aquifer in Saskatchewan

2023· other· en· W6983489944 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhytochemical Studies and Bioactivities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeAquiferGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)StreamflowStructural basinCurrent (fluid)Ecosystem
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Dalmeny Basin both ecosystems and people rely on local watercourses so it is important to determine how groundwater pumping could affect streamflow. As such, simulation of how streamflow would deplete under different scenarios was done using parameters within realistic ranges present in the area. From there the upper limit to the pumping rate before significant ecological damage would occur in the North Saskatchewan River, the region's notable watercourse, was determined. The main method was the use of the R package called streamDepletr and its built in Glower, Hunt, and Hantush functions. One notable result is that a streamed with a weighted average composition resulted in the threshold before ecological damage being lower than if it were solely composed of the Upper floral unit. Additionally, the system is most sensitive to variations in storativity. In comparing the Glover, Hunt, and Hantush methods, it was also discovered that for identical scenarios, the Glover method predicts the most stream depletion white the Hantush method predicts the least. It was determined that to surpass the significant ecological damage threshold, the pumping rate from the Dalmeny Aquifer would have to surpass its recharge rate. Practically, reaching this point is unnecessary given the area's current and historical groundwater usage, as well as unsustainable for the aquifer itself.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicPhytochemical Studies and BioactivitiesFrench-language works237,207