MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977755528 · doi:10.1504/ijetm.2013.054879

Sewage of Tripoli: a review of the current situation and of the future planning

2013· review· en· W1977755528 on OpenAlexaff
Ghinwa Naja, Bohumil Volesky

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Technology and Management · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSewage treatmentSewageEnvironmental planningEnvironmental sciencePopulationCurrent (fluid)WastewaterEnvironmental engineeringEffluentWaste managementEnvironmental protectionWater resource managementEngineeringEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tripoli represents a major urban area in Lebanon with about 350,000 people in the city, which may swell by additional 100,000 when the city surrounding population is counted. It used to be a dominant agricultural region, but the last three decades witnessed a rapid development of urban construction. The goal of this paper was to present the current situation regarding the sewage disposal, contaminating the adjacent coastal areas. Furthermore, the future planning for the Tripoli area was also examined with specific technical recommendations put forward. It is expected that the wastewater treatment plant, as proposed for the city of Tripoli, will solve the problems related to the treatment and discharge of wastewater. However, the wastewater treatment scheme is not without controversies, such as sludge handling and disposal; odour control; the re-use and/or sea dispersal of the treated effluent, and the high costs of the proposed type of treatment.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.270
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 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
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Technology and ManagementSame topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207