Digital solutions for continued operation of WRRFs during pandemics and other interruptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper includes survey results from 17 full-scale water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) to explore their technical, operational, maintenance, and management-related challenges during COVID-19. Based on the survey results, limited monitoring and maintenance of instrumentation and sensors are among the critical factors during the pandemic which resulted in poor data quality in several WRRFs. Due to lockdown of cities and countries, most of the facilities observed interruptions of chemical supply frequency which impacted the treatment process involving chemical additions. Some plants observed influent flow reduction and illicit discharges from industrial wastewater which eventually affected the biological treatment processes. Delays in equipment maintenance also increased the operational and maintenance cost. Most of the plants reported that new set of personnel management rules during pandemic created difficulties in scheduling operator's shifts which directly hampered the plant operations. All the plant operators mentioned that automation, instrumentation, and sensor applications could help plant operations more efficiently while working remotely during pandemic. To handle emergency circumstances including pandemic, this paper also highlights resources and critical factors for emergency responses, preparedness, resiliency, and mitigation that can be adopted by WRRFs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".