MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887594788 · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2018.07.047

Review of global sanitation development

2018· review· en· W2887594788 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment International · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersYale UniversityBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsSanitationSustainable developmentMillennium Development GoalsBusinessImproved sanitationDeveloping countryEnvironmental planningEconomic growthEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEnvironmental engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of the United Nations (UN) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has resulted in an increased focus on developing innovative, sustainable sanitation techniques to address the demand for adequate and equitable sanitation in low-income areas. We examined the background, current situation, challenges, and perspectives of global sanitation. We used bibliometric analysis and word cluster analysis to evaluate sanitation research from 1992 to 2016 based on the Science Citation Index EXPANDED (SCI-EXPANDED) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) databases. Our results show that sanitation is a comprehensive field connected with multiple categories, and the increasing number of publications reflects a strong interest in this research area. Most of the research took place in developed countries, especially the USA, although sanitation problems are more serious in developing countries. Innovations in sanitation techniques may keep susceptible populations from contracting diseases caused by various kinds of contaminants and microorganisms. Hence, the hygienization of human excreta, resource recovery, and removal of micro-pollutants from excreta can serve as effective sustainable solutions. Commercialized technologies, like composting, anaerobic digestion, and storage, are reliable but still face challenges in addressing the links between the political, social, institutional, cultural, and educational aspects of sanitation. Innovative technologies, such as Microbial Fuel Cells (MFCs), Microbial Electrolysis Cells (MECs), and struvite precipitation, are at the TRL (Technology readiness levels) 8 level, meaning that they qualify as "actual systems completed and qualified through test and demonstration." Solutions that take into consideration economic feasibility and all the different aspects of sanitation are required. There is an urgent demand for holistic solutions considering government support, social acceptability, as well as technological reliability that can be effectively adapted to local conditions.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.007

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · 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