Environmental Effects Monitoring Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, all pulp and paper mills need to conduct environmental effects monitoring (EEM) as part of the requirements of the Pulp and Paper Effluent Regulations under the Fisheries Act. EEM studies typically consist of a benthic invertebrate survey, a fish population survey, and an analysis of possible impacts on fish usability. This assessment of Cycle 2 Environmental Effects Monitoring (EEM) data was conducted to determine the type and magnitude of effects occurring on fish and benthic invertebrate communities on a national scale. The predominant response pattern observed in benthic invertebrate communities across the country was one of mild to moderate eutrophication, particularly in riverine habitats, although more pronounced eutrophication was observed at a few mills. These response patterns were characterized by increases in abundance and either increases or decreases in taxon richness. In contrast, the average response pattern observed in marine/estuarine habitats was more indicative of toxic or smothering effects (decreases in both abundance and taxon richness). The benthic invertebrate response in lakes was intermediate between those in riverine and marine/estuarine habitats, although
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.007 |
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".