MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308695131 · doi:10.3390/app122211403

Water Quality Modelling, Monitoring, and Mitigation

2022· article· en· W4308695131 on OpenAlex
Amit Kumar, Santosh S. Palmate, Rituraj Shukla

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWater qualityEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementResource (disambiguation)Quality (philosophy)Environmental scienceBusinessComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the modern era, water quality indices and models have received attention from environmentalists, policymakers, governments, stakeholders, water resource planners, and managers for their ability to evaluate the water quality of freshwater bodies. Due to their wide applicability, models are generally developed based on site-specific guidelines and are not generic; therefore, predicted/calculated values are reported to be highly uncertain. Thus, model and/or index formulation are still challenging and represent a current research hotspot in the scientific community. The inspiration for this Special Issue came from our desire to provide a platform for sharing results and informing young minds around the world to develop suitable models to understand water quality so that mitigation measures can be taken in advance to make water fit for drinking and for life-supporting activities.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.245 · 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