MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196343616 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.160407

Analysis of a High Andean River's Behavior at Loads of Organic Matter Through the Use of Mathematical Models with Experimentally Determined Kinetic Rates

2021· article· en· W3196343616 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carlos Matovelle

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad de CuencaUniversidad Católica de Cuenca
KeywordsOrganic matterAerationEnvironmental scienceNitrificationHydrology (agriculture)Water qualityDegradation (telecommunications)OxygenEnvironmental chemistryNitrogenChemistryEcologyGeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using models of organic matter degradation and dissolved oxygen consumption, the concentrations of these compounds are analyzed in two stretches of a river after a discharge of raw sewage. The analyzed river has low drafts and widths, so the velocity is high and the aeration coefficient kr calculated with the Covar method is high, this indicates a rapid recovery of oxygen from the water consumed by the organic matter degradation processes, the river has been instrumented to measure flows and organic matter at various points to calibrate the model. The hydraulic parameters of the river section are analyzed in three control points, in each one sample are taken to analyze oxygen consumption by organic matter and nitrification through laboratory tests to determine and adjust the kinetics of the processes (kd; knit). This kinetics have been used in the development of a water quality model to verify its adjustment, obtaining higher RMSE results than with kinetics from secondary sources. It is observed that the river has an excellent capacity for self-purification due to the high income of dissolved oxygen, with a kr > 9 d-1.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and PlanningSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207