MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100011491

LICO- Land Improvement Contractors of Ontario

2001· article· en· W7100011491 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTile drainageTileDrainageFlooding (psychology)Water qualityHydrology (agriculture)Drainage system (geomorphology)Pesticide
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2. Tile drainage and dry weather 3. Tile drains and runoff, flooding 1. Tile Drainage and Water Quality Can tile drainage water become contaminated? Yes. Various studies have reported elevated levels of nitrogen 1 2, pesticides 3 4 and pathogens 5 6 in tile drainage outflow from chemical additives and manure. Nitrogen in its nitrate form (NO3-N) dissolves readily in water. This means it can move relatively easily through the soil profile in the “soil water”, and may be intercepted by tile drains. Some pesticides are soluble and can move through the soil in a similar fashion. Surface cracks, worm burrows or root channels, also called

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEuropean Criminal Justice and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207