MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334051348 · doi:10.1061/41036(342)246

A Comparative Study of Water Quality Indices for Karun River

2009· article· en· W2334051348 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Ali Mojahedi, Jalal Attari

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2009 · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIran Water Resources Management CompanyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsWater qualityEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)WatershedAquatic ecosystemWater resource managementRiver pollutionPollutionWater resourcesEcosystemEcologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water quality is an important factor for preservation of human life and aquatic ecosystem. In rivers, water quality is affected by the environment, climate condition, seasonal variation, land-use, natural and man-made pollution of watershed. Considering growth of water use for different consumptions and discharge of pollutions in rivers, several water quality parameters are usually monitored along rivers in different periods. However, there is a need to combine results of such measurements in the form of composite indices which are understandable to decision makers and general public. For this purpose, some indices for classification of water quality in rivers have been applied world wide recently. In this paper, two Water Quality Indices (i.e. National Science Foundation of the USA and Council of Ministers of Environment of Canada) were trialed for the case of Karun River system which is the most important river of Iran. These indices were calculated using existing data and their variations have been analyzed and compared in 9 stations, located along the river, for different periods. Results showed that application of these simplified indices was satisfactory for the educational case study and could be replicated for other communities in Iran.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2009Same topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207