MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246499636 · doi:10.35940/ijeat.b2537.129219

Assessment of Groundwater Quality in Al’am District using the Canadian Water Quality Index

2019· article· en· W4246499636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Haneen A. Kh. Karaghool, Waleed M. Sh. Alabdraba, Abdulla S. Tais, Mohammed Hashım Ameen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwaterWater qualityEnvironmental scienceIndex (typography)Water resource managementTotal dissolved solidsSampling (signal processing)Water wellEnvironmental engineeringHydrology (agriculture)EngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study assesses groundwater quality characteristics in Al’am District which is a part of Salah al-Din Governorate, by use of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index (CCMEWQI). The samples were taken from six groundwater wells for the assessment and sampling was done at six months per year. Based on CCMEWQI calculated values, the six wells from which the samples collected were in poor rank for drinking purpose. The prime causes of deterioration groundwater quality are total dissolved solids (TDS), and total hardness (TH). This study suggested further improvement and continuous monitoring for the groundwater in the study area to provide safe drinking water.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Engineering and Advanced TechnologySame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207