Ground-surface water interactions and the role of the hyporheic zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hyporheic zone describes a region beneath and lateral to the bed of a stream where groundwater and surface water interact. Although the existence of this zone is well recognised, the flow dynamics and mixing processes within the zone are not well understood. To investigate hyporheic zone behavior, numerical groundwater flow models were developed with MODFLOW and calibrated using data collected at a study site on the Magpie River, near Wawa, Ontario, Canada. These models were used to examine the uncertainties of hyporheic zone behaviour at pool-riffle sequences and the response of the hyporheic zone to stream flow regulation. The hyporheic zone was found to be complex and temporally sensitive to stream stage and to groundwater fluxes as determined by streambed permeability and the hydrogeological characteristics of adjacent aquifers. The size of the hyporheic zone was found to be inversely proportional to the flux of groundwater moving towards the stream, and rapid changes in river stage were determined to cause short-term reversals of flow within the hyporheic zone which have important implications on hyporheic zone organisms and their need to adapt to changing environmental conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".