MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984844251 · doi:10.5942/jawwa.2012.104.0058

POU devices in large buildings: Lead removal and water quality

2012· article· en· W1984844251 on OpenAlexaff
Elise Deshommes, Shokoufeh Nour, Benoît Richer, Clément Cartier, Michèle Prévost

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Community Safety and Correctional ServicesPolytechnique MontréalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPOU domainTap waterEnvironmental scienceWater qualityEnvironmental engineeringChemistryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of point‐of‐use (POU) devices to remove dissolved and particulate lead (Pb) and their effect on tap water quality were investigated in a large building under typical usage patterns and during one year. Both forms of Pb were efficiently removed, although materials downstream of the POU devices slightly increased total Pb levels at the tap. No evidence of POU breakthrough was observed following stagnations carried out before sampling. Although measurements of heterotrophic place counts and total and live bacteria on the POU material itself indicated no significant colonization, small but significant increases in viable bacteria at the tap suggest that colonization occurred in the piping and tap downstream of the POU devices in the absence of chlorine residual. This study suggests that these devices are a useful remediation approach to control Pb in large buildings, providing that building maintenance procedures are issued for POU devices.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Water Works AssociationSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207