MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083851272

Speed River Rapids Side Trail, Guelph ON Canada

2025· other· en· W7083851272 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Archive (Internet Archive) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Resources Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowntownRecreationSignageBedrockNational parkHydrology (agriculture)Storm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This 600 metre path, developed by locals and upgraded in 2020 by Guelph Hiking Trail Club (GHTC) volunteers, branches from the City of Guelph's Downtown Trail (part of the Royal Recreational Trail network) between Herb Markle Park and Joseph Walfond Park West. A low dam and the Goldie Mills ruin are relics of the river's industrial past. The rocky path crosses exposed pale grey and white Devonian dolostone (a type of limestone) bedrock of the Guelph Formation, formed during the late Silurian Period about 410 mya. While most of the Guelph Formation is hidden beneath glacial till, its exposure here forms the river channel's walls and sill resulting in rapids and a mini-gorge. Signage posted by the Guelph Hiking Trail Club states: "RAPIDS SIDE TRAIL, A RECREATIONAL FOOTPATH WITH SOME CHALLENGING SECTIONS. This 600 metre recreational trail along the Speed River connects to City Trails and the Trans-Canada Trailway. Armtec. USE TRAIL AT OWN RISK. HIKING PERMITTED COURTESY OF LANDOWNER. Join www.guelphhiking.com Membership fees pay for insurance and trail maintenance." For more information about the Guelph Formation and the area geology, see: Hewlett, K. (1995). 'Elora Gorge: A Visitor's Guide'. Boston Mills Press, Erin Ontario. Karrow, P.F. (1968). 'Pleistocene Geology of the Guelph Area'. Ontario Department of Mines Geological Report No. 61.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.201 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternet Archive (Internet Archive)Same topicWater Quality and Resources StudiesFrench-language works237,207