Consumers’ Perceptions of the Supply of Tap Water in Crisis Situations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper first presents the results of polling on the subject of potable water in crisis situations, with respondents from south-eastern Poland’s Subcarpathian region asked for their opinions on the level of nuisance associated with water supply interruptions and water quality, levels of consumption and water companies’ quality of service. Among the respondents 53% regard the quality of the water they receive as satisfactory, while a quarter see it as only average. However, respondents are relatively satisfied with the corporate response when supplies are interrupted, as methods and means of notification are judged effective by 60%. Continuing with work to assess possibilities for water companies to improve their performance in crisis situations, the present study generates an Analytical Hierarchy Process allowing recipients to determine importance criteria where quality of service is concerned. This could facilitate management by water companies, providing for centralised control and comparison that help secure services of appropriate quality. The process can also help protect different groups of recipients, as safety is evaluated through analysis of functioning, and of failures and losses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it