MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904720481

Assessment of the functionality of rope pumps for sustainable water supply in rural areas of Malawi

2018· article· en· W2904720481 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Kamanga, James Mhango, Reinier Veldman

Bibliographic record

VenueLoughborough University Institutional Repository (Loughborough University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsRopeWater supplySanitationBusinessPopulationRural areaWater resource managementEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sustainable provision of adequate and safe drinking water is the most important of all public services. A high share of the population in Malawi lives in rural areas where access to safe water and access to sanitation is very low. However, non-functionality of water facilities in rural areas continues to affect the availability of potable water further compromising the access. This paper reports on the functionality assessment on one type of hand pumps, the Rope pump, in rural areas which were installed since 2012. Of the 127 Rope pumps that were visited in six districts, 73% of the Rope pumps were functioning and 27% were non-functional as a results of rope breakage, breaking of the handle, dry wells and water quality issues (turbidity and odour). To increase functionality there should be trainings on O&M of the Rope pumps to the users, Self-supply approach should be encouraged to ensure private ownership of the Rope pump and proper sitting of the Rope pump should be emphasised.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLoughborough University Institutional Repository (Loughborough University)Same topicChild Nutrition and Water AccessFrench-language works237,207