MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074087502 · doi:10.1139/s08-022

Quantitative microbial risk assessment of a drinking water – wastewater cross-connection simulation

2008· article· en· W2074087502 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristina D. Mena, Linda C. Mota, Mark C. Meckes, Christopher F. Green, William W. Hurd, Shawn G. Gibbs

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmonellaRisk assessmentWastewaterContaminationEnvironmental healthEnvironmental scienceIncidence (geometry)Exposure assessmentInfection riskToxicologyBiologyRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental engineeringVeterinary medicineMedicineEcologyBacteriaMathematicsEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative microbial risk assessment is a useful way to predict the incidence of infection and illness within a community following exposure to pathogens. We used this risk assessment technique to determine the expected number of Salmonella infections and illnesses resulting from a drinking water – wastewater cross-connection incident using data generated from a distribution system simulator study and compared our results to a reported cross-contamination event that occurred in Pineville, Louisiana in 2000. Probabilities of infection and illness were estimated for different exposure scenarios representing different Salmonella concentrations and the characteristic varied attack rates for waterborne Salmonella. Risks of Salmonella infection range from 10% after a 1 day exposure (assuming the lower bound Salmonella concentration) to a 1-log greater risk of infection for all other scenarios, with risks of infection approximately 99% for 30 and 90 day exposure durations.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207