MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6997303652

Verification of DRAINMOD ver. 5.1 for estimating water balance and nitrogen transport through soils in southern Ontario

2005· dissertation· en· W6997303652 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTile drainageEvapotranspirationWater balanceHydrology (agriculture)DrainageSoil waterWater tableNitrogenSpring (device)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The overall goal of this research was to determine the effectiveness of DRAINMOD ver. 5.1 to estimate the water balance and flow of nitrogen through an agricultural soil system at the Elora Research Station (ERS) near Elora, Canada. The process compared field hydrological data to the modeled outputs of DRAINMOD for calibration of evapotranspiration input parameters and then compared the modeled nitrogen output to field-measured nitrogen data for two different manure application strategies; fall only and spring only incorporated application. Tile drainage was the main focus of the comparison and total loss estimates in the spring had low errors; however, misplaced timing of the modeled losses contributed to increased errors. Depth to water table (DTWT) estimates were poor during the summer and fall months, contributing to an under-estimate of tile drainage in fall. Modeled tile drain nitrate loss estimates followed the same pattern as the measured tile drainage losses. The results of this research indicate that more research and testing associated with DTWT is required before DRAINMOD ver. 5.1 is a reliable hydrological and nitrogen transport model for southern Ontario.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)→Same topicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics→French-language works237,207→