MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2275447316

Exploring Solutions for Sustainable Rural Drinking Water Systems: a study of rural Newfoundland & Labrador drinking water sytems

2014· article· en· W2275447316 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelly Vodden, Sarah Minnes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutreachScope (computer science)Environmental planningWater qualityCorporate governanceSustainabilityWater sourceRural areaBusinessGeographyEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceEconomic growthWater resource managementEnvironmental scienceEconomicsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Exploring Solutions for Sustainable Rural Drinking Water Systems project was initiated in late February 2013 with funding from the Harris Centre – RBC Water Research and Outreach Fund. This project focused on communities of 1,000 residents or less in rural Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) and the unique challenges these communities face concerning their drinking water systems. The project also explored appropriate solutions to identified challenges. The scope of this interdisciplinary project was large, exploring four main components of drinking water systems: 1) source water quality and quantity; 2) infrastructure and operations; 3) public perceptions, awareness and demand; and 4) policy and governance. Though these components have been identified as separate in this project for the purposes of analysis and presentation of research findings, it is important to acknowledge that these aspects of drinking water systems are interrelated. Additionally, challenges faced by rural NL communities are often interconnected, cumulative and complex, interacting in sometimes unexpected ways. The search for effective potential solutions must take these interactions into account.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207