Tenets of a holistic approach to drinking water-associated pathogen research, management, and communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, drinking water-associated pathogens that can cause infections in immunocompromised or otherwise susceptible individuals (henceforth referred to as DWPI), sometimes referred to as opportunistic pathogens or opportunistic premise plumbing pathogens, have received considerable attention. DWPI research has largely been conducted by experts focusing on specific microorganisms or within silos of expertise. The resulting mitigation approaches optimized for a single microorganism may have unintended consequences and trade-offs for other DWPI or other interests (e.g., energy costs and conservation). For example, the ecological and epidemiological issues characteristic of Legionella pneumophila diverge from those relevant for Mycobacterium avium and other nontuberculous mycobacteria. Recent advances in understanding DWPI as part of a complex microbial ecosystem inhabiting drinking water systems continues to reveal additional challenges: namely, how can all microorganisms of concern be managed simultaneously? In order to protect public health, we must take a more holistic approach in all aspects of the field, including basic research, monitoring methods, risk-based mitigation techniques, and policy. A holistic approach will (i) target multiple microorganisms simultaneously, (ii) involve experts across several disciplines, and (iii) communicate results across disciplines and more broadly, proactively addressing source water-to-customer system management.
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 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 | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".