MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183380422 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2015-0227

Multilevel performance management framework for small to medium sized water utilities in Canada

2015· article· en· W2183380422 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Husnain Haider, Rehan Sadiq, Solomon Tesfamariam

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBenchmarkingCustomer satisfactionPerformance indicatorPerformance managementComponent (thermodynamics)Water utilityBusinessPerformance measurementEnvironmental economicsBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceProcess managementOperations managementWater supplyEngineeringMarketingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, small to medium sized water utilities (SMWU) do not often participate in National Water and Wastewater Benchmarking Initiative due to lesser economies of scale, lack of resources, and data limitations. Consequently, such SMWU are managing their functional components (i.e., environmental, personnel, operational, physical assets, customer satisfaction, public health, and financial) without quantitatively assessing and knowing if they are meeting their performance objectives. A multilevel performance management framework, consisting of five modules has been developed and implemented for SMWU in BC, Canada. The framework provides an approach to identify and select the suitable performance indicators for SMWU, and to use them for inter-utility performance benchmarking under limited data. The subsequent modules can be used for detailed performance management at utility, system, and sub-component levels. The utility managers can effectively employ this framework to identify the underperforming functional components and can rationally take corrective actions, and address customer satisfaction with efficient inventory management and data analyses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207