MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2736615507 · doi:10.12691/env-5-2-2

Evaluation of Groundwater Quality Using CCME Water Quality Index in the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant Area, Ishwardi, Pabna, Bangladesh

2017· article· en· W2736615507 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican journal of environmental protection · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJagannath University
KeywordsIndex (typography)Water qualityQuality (philosophy)Water resource managementUsabilityGroundwaterEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental resource managementHydrology (agriculture)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water Quality Index (WQI) is one of the most powerful and effective tools for analyzing overall characteristics of water quality any reservoirs, its way to transfer information on water quality trends to policy makers and the general public is with Indices. Our objective was to evaluate ground water quality in the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant (RNPP) area, Pabna, Bangladesh using a Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) WQI. WQI represent a clear scenario about the usability of the water for different purposes. Water quality indices are useful for concise information in order to achieve a national perspective. Attempts have been made to review the WQI criteria for the appropriateness of drinking water sources. Till now any methodology is not developed for evaluation of water quality index purposes in Bangladesh. At the very recent a few researcher try to use WQI method for giving WQ rating in Bangladesh. But, has no specific guideline for indexing water resources. This study to explore a potential WQ indexing method which applies easily and measure overall WQ for managing purposes. Besides, the present article also highlights and draws attention towards the development of a new and globally accepted “Water Quality Index” in a simplified format, which may be used at large and could represent the reliable picture of water quality. In the present paper, water quality index (WQI) was estimated for the groundwater of Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant area within the study period. The study also identifies the critical pollutants affecting the groundwater quality during the study period. The indices have been computed for the winter season at 17 locations, namely GW1, GW2, GW3 etc. It was found that the water quality ranged from poor to marginal category at all locations. Alkalinity, Conductivity, BOD, DO, Iron, Arsenic, Lead, Nitrite and fecal coliforms were found to be critical parameters.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.242 · 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