MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7018340040

Developing a Dynamic Simulation Model for Phosphorus Cycling in Lakes(Case Study: Lake Ontario)

2014· article· en· W7018340040 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrientCyclingVariable (mathematics)PhosphorusDynamic simulation modelStratification (seeds)PhytoplanktonState variable
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Food cycle creates a mechanism through which nutrients and other components of life are available for the living organisms. Improper function of the cycle may lead to disruption in the life cycle of organisms. In this paper, the dynamic flow of phosphorus, which is essential for plant growth, was studied considering three state variables: productive organisms (organic phosphorus), dead organisms (organic phosphorus) and inorganic phosphorus. According to the three state variable’s feedbacks, phosphorus and phytoplankton simulation model was developed using the system dynamics approach and considering governing equations, feedback loops, and input and output streams. The behavior of each state variable was evaluated during a year for Lake Ontario. The result revealed that the model benefits from the desired performance in simulating and estimating the variable concentrations. It can be clearly seen that stratification and completely mixing of the lake during two periods (day 100 to 158, and day 315 to 335) have paramount impact on the variable concentrations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.315 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics→French-language works237,207→