MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7095697344

Prairie Hydrological Model Study Progress Report,

2008· article· en· W7095697344 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrology (agriculture)StreamflowHydrological modellingDrainage basinWetlandStructural basinCatchment hydrologySnowmeltSnow
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report is an update on progress made to the middle of December 2008, corresponding to “Milestone Month 20”. According to our study plan, at this milestone “we will have completed a wetland module and with evaluation on Smith Creek Research Basin and archival data available at the Centre for Hydrology (Objective 3, 4)”. More specifically, Objectives 3 and 4 are stated as: • Objective 3: A physically based, hydrological response unit-based hydrological model, (the Prairie Hydrological Model), will be developed that is suitable for multiple season simulation of the hydrology of the Canadian Prairie environment. The model will be capable of predicting water balance, soil moisture, snow cover, actual evaporation and streamflow on a daily time-step with minimal calibration of model parameters from streamflow records. The model will contain a wetland module that includes assigned variable drainage rates from the wetland. The intended basins would drain to a stream or internally drained lake/wetland, with basin size to be greater than ~1 km2 and less than ~250 km2. • Objective 4: The Prairie Hydrological Model will be evaluated at Smith Creek

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.012

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→