How Urban Storm- and Wastewater Management Prepares for Emerging Opportunities and Threats: Digital Transformation, Ubiquitous Sensing, New Data Sources, and Beyond - A Horizon Scan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ubiquitous sensing will create many opportunities and threats for urban water management, which are only poorly understood today. To identify the most relevant trends, we conducted a horizon scan regarding how ubiquitous sensing will shape the future of urban drainage and wastewater management. Our survey of the international urban water community received an active response from both the academics and the professionals from the water industry. The analysis of the responses demonstrates that emerging topics for urban water will often involve experts from different communities, including aquatic ecologists, urban water system engineers and managers, as well as information and communications technology professionals and computer scientists. Activities in topics that are identified as novel will either require (i) cross-disciplinary training, such as importing new developments from the IT sector, or (ii) research in new areas for urban water specialists, for example, to help solve open questions in aquatic ecology. These results are, therefore, a call for interdisciplinary research beyond our own discipline. They also demonstrate that the water management community is not yet prepared for the digital transformation, where we will experience a data demand, i.e. a ?pull? of urban water data into external services. The results suggest that a lot remains to be done to harvest the upcoming opportunities. Horizon scanning should be repeated on a routine basis, under the umbrella of an experienced polling organization.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".