MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W155372108 · doi:10.1007/1-4020-4685-5_26

WATER REUSE IN CANADA: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES

2006· book-chapter· en· W155372108 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kirsten Exall, Jiří Maršálek, Karl A. Schaefer

Bibliographic record

VenueKluwer Academic Publishers eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsGreywaterReuseWastewaterStormwaterWater supplyReclaimed waterEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planningSustainabilityWater qualityEffluentPopulationEnvironmental engineeringWaste managementEngineeringSurface runoff

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reclamation and reuse of various types of wastewater, including stormwater, greywater, and domestic wastewater, represents an important component of the urban water cycle helping close the loop between water supply and wastewater disposal. Safe and scientifically-based water and wastewater reuse has been practised for about a century, and a great wealth of practical experience with such practices has been reported in the literature. Essential elements of water reuse plans include the selection of categories of reuse, selection of water quality criteria for such specific reuses (in accordance with the existing regulations and guidelines), design of the treatment train providing the effluent of the required quality, and examination of overall feasibility. In Canada, water reuse is generally conducted on a small-scale or experimental basis. While no national guidelines exist at this time, a number of provinces have developed guidelines for specific water reuse applications. The current stresses on water supply, caused by growing population and increasing water demands, depletion of water sources, reduced supply reliability caused by climate change, ageing infrastructure and limited funding for its expansion, as well as the promotion of environmental sustainability and needs to reduce wastewater discharges to sensitive receiving waters, will contribute to further growth and expansion of water and wastewater reclamation and reuse.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.144 · 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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKluwer Academic Publishers eBooksSame topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207