MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063697750 · doi:10.2166/wst.2008.135

monEAU: a platform for water quality monitoring networks

2008· article· en· W2063697750 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)StandardizationEnvironmental monitoringQuality (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)Computer scienceNetwork monitoringData qualityContinuous monitoringRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringEngineeringOperations managementEnvironmental engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous monitoring of water quality creates huge amounts of data and therefore requires new concepts to guarantee high data quality and to prevent data graveyards. Monitoring stations commonly used in practice today suffer from insufficient flexibility and a lack of standardization. That is, although a lot of monitoring tasks are comparable and should lead to robust and powerful platforms, most monitoring stations are case specific developments. In this paper the underlying ideas of a new generation of monitoring networks is described. First a problem analysis of monitoring stations typically seen in current river monitoring practice is outlined, then the monEAU vision on monitoring networks will be discussed together with an overview of a planned system set-up with innovative data evaluation concept.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.242 · 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