MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluating the Environmental Impacts of Water Distribution Systems by Using EIO-LCA-Based Multiobjective Optimization

2010· article· en· W2019758683 on OpenAlexaff
L. M. Herstein, Yves Filion, K. R. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Resources Planning and Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)SortingMulti-objective optimizationLife-cycle assessmentEnvironmental scienceGenetic algorithmEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental economicsEconomicsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceProduction (economics)MathematicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change has made environmental impact a factor of growing importance in decision making for municipalities. Increasingly, the environmental impacts of expanding and operating a water distribution system (WDS) are considered alongside the cost and hydraulic design. This paper presents a nondominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) that minimizes capital costs, annual pumping energy use, and environmental impacts in WDS design that adheres to hydraulic constraints. A previously developed environmental impact (EI) index is included in the environmental objective function of the optimization program. The EI index normalizes and aggregates multiple environmental measures evaluated with an economic input-output life-cycle assessment (EIO-LCA) model. The EIO-LCA-based NSGA-II was applied to the Anytown network. Annual pumping energy use was found to dominate the EI index while capital cost and the EI index were inversely related, and the annual pumping energy use and the EI index followed a near linear relationship. The location and shape of the Pareto fronts were sensitive to demand and roughness coefficient (C-factor) adjustments with greater sensitivity observed for changes in demand than changes in the C-factor.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations53
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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