MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283657225 · doi:10.2166/ws.2022.245

Water quality analysis using the CCME-WQI method with time series analysis in a water supply reservoir

2022· article· en· W4283657225 on OpenAlexaff
Lijiang Hu, Libin Chen, Qing Li, Kaipeng Zou, Jinrui Li, Hui Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology Water Supply · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsCanadian Hydrographic Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater qualityAutoregressive integrated moving averageEnvironmental scienceInflowWater supplyHydrology (agriculture)Time seriesQuality (philosophy)Environmental engineeringStatisticsMeteorologyMathematicsGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The quality of the drinking water source reservoirs has always been a research hotspot. However, few have studies focused on the water quality of reservoirs over a relatively long period with time series analysis. In this paper, based on water quality and hydrological data from 2010 to 2020, considering 8 water quality parameters, CCME-WQI with time series analysis was used to explore the interannual and seasonal changes in water quality in the Weishui Reservoir. Furthermore, the main factors affecting water quality were discussed through correlation analysis. The ARIMA model is used to predict water quality in the future. The results show that the water quality was seriously polluted from 2012 to 2013. After 2018, the water quality gradually improved and stabilized. In addition, the water quality is affected by inflow, showing the characteristics of poor water quality in summer and winter. The key parameters affecting water quality are TN and TP, which are almost 2 times higher than the grade II standard of water quality standard. Through the ARIMA model, it is predicted that CCME-WQI is maintained at 80.46 indicating that the water quality will be stable in the future.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations35
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & Technology Water SupplySame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207