MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2590256642 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c426

An Assessment of Source Water Quality in Karoi, Mashonaland West Province, Zimbabwe

2017· article· en· W2590256642 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reniko Gondo, Wisemen Chingombe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater qualityWater sourceQuality (philosophy)Water resource managementGeographySocioeconomicsEnvironmental scienceSociologyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to assess the quality of source water used for domestic purposes in the town of Karoi.The objectives were: to determine the quality of surface water in the study area; and to characterize point and non-point sources of pollution.The study examined physical and chemical surface water quality parameters that may indicate pollution and so help to identify surface water pollution.The results showed that most of the measured parameters in surface water examined in Karoi were within the acceptable range of WHO drinking water guidelines.When compared with the guidelines, electrical conductivity was slightly higher; turbidity and total suspended solids were significantly higher in the wet season than in the dry season due to water flowing, which carries particles with it; and the changing seasons resulted in slight changes in surface water temperature.The results suggest that some human activities, like agriculture and poor sewage disposal in Karoi, can reduce surface water quality in Karoi.

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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207