MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spectral analysis in determining water quality sampling intervals

2019· article· en· W2977392146 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

VenueRevista Brasileira de Recursos Hídricos · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)Representativeness heuristicStatisticsNyquist frequencySeries (stratigraphy)Water qualityCalibrationQuality (philosophy)ExecutableNyquist–Shannon sampling theoremEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingComputer scienceMathematicsGeographyTelecommunicationsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT To make water quality series more representative, real-time monitoring techniques are developed. However, these techniques have obstacles in their use, such as high costs and difficulties in equipment installation, maintenance, and calibration. One alternative is near-real time water quality monitoring (NRTWQM), with sampling done less frequently than daily. The study objective was to evaluate, through spectral analysis, the water quality sampling frequency representativity for different catchments. For this purpose, a historical series of real time water quality monitoring stations were used in Brazil, Canada, and the USA. These series were submitted to spectral analysis to identify the denser frequencies and their representativeness across the series. To obtain the sampling intervals, the Nyquist-Shannon theorem was applied. Weekly intervals accounted for 65% of cumulative frequencies for the three verified parameters, and the sampling intervals obtained by means of the characteristic frequencies were shown to be executable in the NRTWQM models for up to the 90% of cumulative frequency. For cumulative frequency above 90%, the intervals approach the daily values.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.273 · 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