Including operational data in QMRA model: development and impact of model inputs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Monte Carlo model, based on the Quantitative Microbial Risk Analysis approach (QMRA), has been developed to assess the relative risks of infection associated with the presence of Cryptosporidium and Giardia in drinking water. The impact of various approaches for modelling the initial parameters of the model on the final risk assessments is evaluated. The Monte Carlo simulations that we performed showed that the occurrence of parasites in raw water was best described by a mixed distribution: log-Normal for concentrations > detection limit (DL), and a uniform distribution for concentrations < DL. The selection of process performance distributions for modelling the performance of treatment (filtration and ozonation) influences the estimated risks significantly. The mean annual risks for conventional treatment are: 1.97E-03 (removal credit adjusted by log parasite = log spores), 1.58E-05 (log parasite = 1.7 x log spores) or 9.33E-03 (regulatory credits based on the turbidity measurement in filtered water). Using full scale validated SCADA data, the simplified calculation of CT performed at the plant was shown to largely underestimate the risk relative to a more detailed CT calculation, which takes into consideration the downtime and system failure events identified at the plant (1.46E-03 vs. 3.93E-02 for the mean risk).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".