MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804566905 · doi:10.2166/wst.2002.0269

Development of a risk-based TMDL assessment approach using the integrated modeling system GIBSI

2002· article· en· W2804566905 on OpenAlexaff
Alain N. Rousseau, Alain Mailhot, Jean‐Pierre Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceNonpoint source pollutionEffluentWater qualityRisk assessmentEnvironmental engineeringTotal maximum daily loadHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the integrated modeling system GIB SI and a case study, this paper presents the development of a risk-based TMDL assessment approach that links wet (nonpoint/diffuse) and dry weather (point) sources to a probability of exceeding water quality standards (WQS) governing wateruses. The case study focused on determining whether WQS defining recreational uses of water requiring direct and prolonged contact were attainable if the waste water effluent of a small town was treated using aerated lagoons and if the agricultural nonpoint source (NPS) loads were reduced using different fertilization rates. Dry weather sources were assumed to solely contribute to bacteriological impairment of the studied river reach. Meanwhile, both wet and dry weather sources were assumed to contribute to aesthetic impairment. Simulation results showed that treating the waste water effluent while reducing the agricultural NPS loads by 27% allowed on average over a four-year study period for attainment of the bacteriological WQS 100% of the summer time while lowering the probability of exceeding the aesthetic WQS from 0.32 to 0.19 (30 to 18 days). The results of this study showed this risk-based assessment approach was well suited to establish TMDL. These probabilities should be evaluated using long meteorological series.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207