MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010313737 · doi:10.2166/wst.2007.757

Experience with the antibiotic resistance analysis and DNA fingerprinting in tracking faecal pollution at two lake beaches

2007· article· en· W2010313737 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas A. Edge, Stephen J. Hill, G. Stinson, Peter Seto, J. Maršálek

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutionAntibiotic resistanceFecal coliformContaminationFecesEnvironmental scienceSource trackingEnvironmental healthRisk analysis (engineering)GeographyBiologyEcologyAntibioticsMicrobiologyWater qualityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posting or closing of swimming beaches because of faecal contamination is a widespread problem reported in many locations. In a risk-based approach to this problem, the risk to swimmers' health is assessed by field monitoring of indicator bacteria and the associated risks are managed by source controls and other remedial measures. In risk assessment, great advances have been made in recent years with the introduction of microbial source tracking (MST) techniques. Two such techniques, antibiotic resistance analysis and DNA fingerprinting, were applied in a study of causes of faecal contamination at two lake beaches in Toronto, Ontario. Both methods identified bird faeces as the dominant sources of E. coli. Coping with this type of pollution presents a major environmental challenge.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207