MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204491645 · doi:10.34218/ijciet.12.8.2021.005

SURFACE WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT AND MAPPING OF PERIYAR RIVER USING CANADIAN COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF THE ENVIRONMENT WATER QUALITY INDEX METHOD

2021· article· en· W3204491645 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
P. C. Aneesh, Roy M. Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater qualityIndex (typography)Council of MinistersSurface waterEnvironmental scienceQuality (philosophy)Hydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementEnvironmental engineeringComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringGeotechnical engineeringEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the view of higher demand of fresh water, water quality assessment has to be done periodically. In this study, the water quality of the Periyar River, which is located in Kerala, India is evaluated. River Periyar is considered as the lifeline of Kerala. Twentyfive percentage of Kerala's industries are located at the banks of Periyar River. Due to the disposal of untreated or partially treated waste in to the river, the water quality of the river changes. In order to make the water fit for drinking purpose, the water quality parameters should lie in permissible limit. The water quality data measurement results obtained from CPCB during the year 2019 was used as the input data. Water quality was evaluated by Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environmental Water Quality Index (CCME WQI) method. QGIS was adopted to map the WQI values. IDW interpolation technique was adopted for mapping. WQI of station numbers SS:2333 and SS:18 showed almost good WQ compared to other sampling stations as it is not an industrialized area. The flood happened in Kerala influenced a lot in the water quality. Station number SS:2333 showed a WQI of 83.8, which is the largest value obtained during the entire course of study. WQI of station number SS:17 is obtained as 51.36, which is the lowest among all results. From the study it is evident that CCME WQI is a good indicator for water quality assessment and can be used for similar type studies.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 CIVIL ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)Same topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207