MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135973695 · doi:10.1061/41069(360)139

Quantification and Measurement of Level of Service of Water Distribution Networks

2009· article· en· W2135973695 on OpenAlexafffund
Z. J. Khan, Osama Moselhi, Tarek Zayed

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAmerican Water Works Association Research FoundationWater Research Foundation
KeywordsAsset (computer security)Asset managementReliability (semiconductor)Context (archaeology)Service (business)Computer scienceService levelEnvironmental economicsOrder (exchange)Quality of serviceRisk analysis (engineering)IT service continuityHierarchyReliability engineeringBusinessComputer securityEngineeringFinanceComputer networkMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determination and quantification of levels of service in municipal context assist in performing quality-cost trade-off analysis for its services. This trade-off depends on the willingness of a community to pay for municipal services as well as on the condition of municipal assets. This paper presents a simple and generic methodology to develop a level of service model for water distribution networks. In order to develop this Analytical Hierarchy based model, in all nine operational level performance measures are identified. These account for reliability, capacity, and health and safety concerns related to a water network. A hypothetical case study is designed to exemplify the proposed method. Output of the model is in terms of service percentile which is an integrated representation of asset performance to meet user's requirements. This model can assist asset managers in quantifying the improvements required in asset performance and in making more informed decision towards sustainable asset management.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207