MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030951556 · doi:10.2166/ws.2010.173

Challenges in addressing variability of lead in domestic plumbing

2010· article· en· W2030951556 on OpenAlexaff
Michael R. Schock, France G. Lemieux

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology Water Supply · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLead (geology)CorrosionEnvironmental scienceLeaching (pedology)Water treatmentEnvironmental engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessMetallurgyMaterials scienceSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current data indicates that lead exposure is of concern even at low concentrations. Corrosion is an important problem in drinking water because it can affect public health due to leaching of lead or other metals into the drinking water. For this reason, a corrosion control program is an important measure to help mitigate exposure to lead in drinking water. The biggest challenge that remains in assessing corrosion control through monitoring programs is the variability of the concentrations of metals such as lead in drinking water, and the interpretation of the results when using different approaches for monitoring. This is due to the many factors that contribute to the leaching of metals from drinking water distribution system materials. Balancing the challenges of stagnation time, sample volume and sampling frequency to assess corrosion control with their practicality and the need to ensure optimal corrosion control treatment are important considerations for regulators and decision-makers to ensure that potential exposure to lead through drinking water is minimized.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & Technology Water SupplySame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207