MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2379121189

Analysis of drinking water quality monitoring results in a district of Guangzhou from 2004 to 2008

2010· article· en· W2379121189 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenji Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Disease Control and Prevention · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Resources and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTap waterWater supplyTurbidityWater qualityEnvironmental scienceToxicologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Environmental engineeringGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate the sanitary situation of the drinking water in a certain district of Guangzhou and provide scientific basis for strengthening the supervision and management of drinking water supply.Methods Samples of the terminal tap water and the second water supply were analyzed by statistics from 2004 to 2008.The detective indicators included turbidity,total number of bacteria,total large intestine and chlorine. Results The total qualification rate was 41.45% for terminal tap water,and 31.21% for the second water supply.The annual qualification rate was raised.The total qualification rate of terminal tap water was higher than that of the second water supply.The total rates and the distribution of the qualified projects were same.The qualification rate of the quarters was significantly different,while the second and third quarter was 23.30% and 20.00%,respectively.The qualification rate of total bacteria was consistent in each quarter.The qualification rate of free residual chlorine in the second water supply was obviously lower than that in the terminal tap water.Conclusions The total qualification rate of the drinking water was raised year by year,but still low,with difference among the quarters.It should be enhanced for monitoring and guarding the quality of the drinking water.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of Disease Control and PreventionSame topicWater Resources and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207