ASSINIBOINE RIVER WATER QUALITY STUDY LAKE OF THE PRAIRIES TO THE CITY OF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the western portion of Manitoba to its confluence with the Red River within the City of Winnipeg. Roughly 60 % (24,900 km2) of the relatively large watershed is within the province of Manitoba and drains an area dominated by agriculture and populated with about 800,000 people. The Assiniboine River is used for recreational activities such as boating, canoeing, water skiing, fishing, and swimming and is the drinking water source for the cities of Brandon and Portage la Prairie. The river provides essential habitat for about 40 species of fish and its shoreline supports numerous plant and animal species. Water drawn from the river is used for irrigation and for facilities such as food processing industries. The Assiniboine River is also the recipient of treated effluent from a number of municipal and industrial wastewater treatment facilities. In response to questions regarding the impact of development along the Assiniboine River, two major studies were undertaken on the lower reaches of the Assiniboine River (Cooley et al. 2001a and b, and North/South Consultants Inc. and Earth Tech (Canada) Inc. 2002). Both studies address the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus inputs on the growth of algae and the associated impacts on downstream water uses. However, the reach of the Assiniboine River
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".