MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fuzzy-Logic Modeling of Risk Assessment for a Small Drinking-Water Supply System

2009· article· en· W1995761515 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mi-Jin Lee, Edward A. McBean, Mirnader Ghazali, Corinne J. Schuster‐Wallace, Jinhui Jeanne Huang‬‬‬‬

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Resources Planning and Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFault tree analysisFuzzy logicRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceFuzzy setSet (abstract data type)Water supplyReliability engineeringSensitivity (control systems)Process (computing)Decision treeEngineeringData miningBusinessArtificial intelligenceEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A set of risk factors and a fault tree methodology in conjunction with fuzzy logic is described to assess potential contributing factors to failures in water supply systems. The fault tree methodology establishes the structure of the risks, and the fuzzy logic analysis translates qualitative risk data into probabilities. The methodology affords guidance to the decision-making process indicating when the risk is severe and what constitutes a contributory factor that warrants specific attention. The model is applied to a case study in North Battleford, Saskatchewan and sensitivity tests are used to demonstrate the model’s utility to assess the implications of individual factors.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Resources Planning and ManagementSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207