MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051303461 · doi:10.4236/jep.2014.51001

Air Quality Monitoring and Its Implication on the Environmental Licensing Process in Brazil

2014· article· en· W2051303461 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
José Carlos de Moura Xavier, Wilson Cabral de Sousa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Protection · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicUnavailabilityAir quality indexAir pollutionEnvironmental qualityQuality (philosophy)Environmental sciencePopulationEnvironmental planningBusinessEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental protectionGeographyEngineeringEnvironmental healthMeteorologyEconomicsPolitical scienceReliability engineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil, public policies regarding the air quality aimed at the welfare of the population are strongly dependent on monitoring conducted by the Sao Paulo State Environmental Company (CETESB), which can be influenced by faulty monitors and equipment support and cuts in power supply, among others. A research conducted from 1998 to 2008 indicated that a significant portion of the air quality automatic stations in the state of Sao Paulo did not meet the criterion of representativeness of measurements of PM10, NO2, O3, CO and SO2 concentrations which resulted in the classification of some municipalities as the nonattainment area, a situation evidenced for PM10 and O3 parameters. The network unavailability for each parameter was estimated and compared with the monitoring networks operated in Canada and the UK. This paper discusses the implications of the lack of representativeness of measurements in the environmental licensing process of pollution sources from 2008, when by the effect of state law, municipalities have been qualified according to their air quality nonattainment level.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental ProtectionSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207