MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315438927 · doi:10.1061/9780784479162.116

A Critical Review of Water Reuse in North America: The Historical Shift from Technological Priorities to Public Perception Studies

2015· review· en· W2315438927 on OpenAlexaff
D. Al-Ali, Yves Filion

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2015 · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReuseScarcityWater scarcityPopulationProcess (computing)Environmental planningWater resourcesEngineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceSociologyWaste managementEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water reuse is an increasingly popular consideration for municipalities, developers, and businesses. Currently, the majority of water reuse applications originate from Australia, Southeast Asian nations, and the Middle East. Stresses posed by population growth and/or water scarcity seem to be the primary drivers for the prevalence of reuse applications in these regions. However, an increasing number of regions in North America are in the process of implementing or have already implemented some form of water reuse. As a result, this paper aims to present an overview of the history and current state of reuse in North America, with the objective of defining past and current challenges, gaps in current research, and necessary steps for more robust reuse applications. Ultimately, the paper critically assesses the trajectory of reuse projects in North America from the 1970s onwards; highlighting the gradual shift in focus from technological feasibility to public perception studies associated with water reuse.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2015Same topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207