MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037154152 · doi:10.1139/l00-067

Greater Vancouver's drinking water treatment program

2001· article· en· W2037154152 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
A.M. Ferguson, Douglas G. Neden

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWater qualityFlushingTurbidityWater treatmentEnvironmental engineeringFiltration (mathematics)Water resource management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) supplies water to 1.9 million people from three coastal mountain watersheds. Water quality concerns identified include waterborne disease risks associated with Giardia and Cryptosporidium, episodes of elevated turbidity, bacterial regrowth in the distribution system, and corrosive water. To address these concerns, the GVRD has initiated a $300 million capital program to upgrade its treatment capabilities that includes two 1200 ML·d–1 ozone and corrosion control facilities, a 1000 ML·d–1 filtration plant, and an ongoing program of rechlorination stations and distribution system improvements. This paper provides an overview of the GVRD's drinking water treatment program and related initiatives. These include the decision-making process related to using ozone without filtration, the process selection and selected project delivery method for the Seymour filtration plant, and, lastly, the ongoing secondary disinfection program which includes unidirectional flushing, reservoir exercising, environmental management, and remote data monitoring and data evaluation using a geographical information system application.Key words: water quality, protozoa, ozone, direct filtration, rechlorination, remote monitoring, GIS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207