MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143504140 · doi:10.1039/b107768f

Monitoring dissolved organic carbon in surface and drinking waters

2002· review· en· W2143504140 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

VenueJournal of Environmental Monitoring · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsAmerican Water (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissolved organic carbonTurbidityTotal organic carbonOrganic matterWater qualityEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceSurface waterSurface runoffBaseflowPrecipitationAbsorbanceChemistryHydrology (agriculture)Environmental engineeringDrainage basinEcologyStreamflowChromatographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of natural organic matter (NOM) strongly impacts drinking water treatment, water quality, and water behavior during distribution. Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations were determined daily over a 22 month period in river water before and after conventional drinking water treatment using an on-line total organic carbon (TOC) analyzer. Quantitative and qualitative variations in organic matter were related to precipitation and runoff, seasons and operating conditions. Following a rainfall event, DOC levels could increase by 3.5 fold over baseflow concentrations, while color, UV absorbance values and turbidity increased by a factor of 8, 12 and 300, respectively. Treated water DOC levels were closely related to the source water quality, with an average organic matter removal of 42% after treatment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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