MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235391068 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14660439.v1

The Characterization of Significant Direct Threats to Source Watersheds: a Risk-Based Approach

2021· preprint· en· W4235391068 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alicia Kelly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryWater sourceCryptosporidiumGiardiaEnvironmental scienceWater resourcesRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessWater resource managementBiologyEcologyPolitical scienceLawMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2004, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment proposed the 'Drinking water source protection act' which stipulated that, in the development of water protection plans, significant direct threats to source watersheds are to be identified. Examination of the major risk factors threatening water resources proved there are insufficient scientific data available to regulators to accomplish this task. Research showed E.coli O157:H7, Salmonella, Giardia lamblia, and Cryptosporidium parvum, and the sources of these pathogens in the environment are, qualitatively, significant threats to water resources. However, a quantitative characterization of significance depends of the failure probabilities of pathogen sources. Using the Ontario Spills Action Centre data, the occurrence of failure was found to have a high non-zero probability. However, considerable uncertainties revealed in these data suggest that a better understanding of failure is critical to accurately characterize significant threats to drinking water resources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0140.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207