MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998755931 · doi:10.1109/tc.2013.140

A Decision Support System for the Design and Evaluation of Sustainable Wastewater Solutions

2013· article· en· W1998755931 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAustralian National University
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)SustainabilityDecision support systemModular designComponent (thermodynamics)ScalabilityBrainstormingRelation (database)Risk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringProcess managementManagement scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The drive toward sustainable wastewater management is challenging the conventional paradigm of linear end-of-pipe solutions. A shift toward more sustainable solutions requires that information about new ideas, systems, and technologies be more readily accessible for addressing wastewater problems. It is commonly argued that decision-making needs to involve engineers and other community representatives to define values and brainstorm solutions. This paper describes a decision support system (DSS) prototype that is designed to help community planners identify solutions which balance environmental, economic, and social goals. The system is designed to be scalable, adaptable, and flexible to allow fair assessment of new ideas and technologies. It supports the exploration of consequences of various alternatives and visualizes the tradeoffs between them. Our DSS takes in modular descriptions of components and a description of a community context, automates the design of alternative wastewater systems, and facilitates evaluating how well each design satisfies the given context. It provides an adaptable platform from which new solutions can be designed without having to predefine how a single component fits within a specific system. Our DSS facilitates the exploration of alternative solutions by visualizing the effect of various tradeoffs and their consequences in relation to the community's sustainability goals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.214 · 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