MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2532933509 · doi:10.5942/jawwa.2016.108.0167

Monitoring‐Based Framework to Detect and Manage Lead Water Service Lines

2016· article· en· W2532933509 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanadian Water Network
KeywordsLead (geology)Environmental scienceFlushingPipingRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental engineeringMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Profile sampling was conducted using 112 dwellings of various types and configurations of water pipes consisting of lead service lines (LSLs). A detailed investigation of plumbing volumes was conducted in 44 of these homes. Results revealed a wide range of piping volume and associated lead profiling trends. These differences are critical for exposure assessment and interpretation of regulatory sampling results that most often use first draw results after stagnation. Moreover, while peak lead levels in the profiles were comparable between households, the volume in which these elevated lead levels occurred varied with dwelling type and LSL configuration. Mean profile concentrations were successfully correlated to concentrations after flushing, suggesting that a simplified LSL detection protocol could be applied on a large scale. A framework is proposed on the basis of these results to screen for LSLs, validate lead reduction strategies, identify sites at risk of elevated exposure, and support public health actions.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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