MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983715260 · doi:10.1039/b909521g

Statistical approaches used to assess and redesign surface water-quality-monitoring networks

2009· review· en· W1983715260 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Monitoring · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)Computer scienceQuality (philosophy)Sampling designSystems engineeringData miningEngineeringTelecommunicationsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An up-to-date review of the statistical approaches utilized for the assessment and redesign of surface water quality monitoring (WQM) networks is presented. The main technical aspects of network design are covered in four sections, addressing monitoring objectives, water quality variables, sampling frequency and spatial distribution of sampling locations. This paper discusses various monitoring objectives and related procedures used for the assessment and redesign of long-term surface WQM networks. The appropriateness of each approach for the design, contraction or expansion of monitoring networks is also discussed. For each statistical approach, its advantages and disadvantages are examined from a network design perspective. Possible methods to overcome disadvantages and deficiencies in the statistical approaches that are currently in use are recommended.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.265
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.117 · 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