Design of Pilot Scale for Measuring the Security of Access to Water in Guanajuato, Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Food security is the state in which all persons have always access to the food needed to meet their dietary requirements, but food security cannot be achieved without considering the access to water (water security – WS). Considered a human right, water must meet the following criteria: sufficient, safe, acceptable, available, and accessible (FAO, 2002). Objective To identify the state of food security and access to water in Mexican households. Methods Water security was assessed using a pilot scale. The scale was applied as part of a survey in 458 households, containing also an experience‐based food security scale ( Escala Latinoamericana y Caribeña de Seguridad Alimentaria). Results The water security scale contains 17 items addressing four domains concerning water: one for sufficiency, six for safety, one for acceptability, four for availability and five for access, concerning costs and physical access (FAO, 2002). Conclusions Water Security is a human right, internationally recognized. The proposed scale represents an instrument that allows assessing issues related to the lack of appropriate access to water.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".