MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366484353 · doi:10.1021/acsestwater.2c00627

Practical Framework for Evaluation and Improvement of Drinking Water Treatment Robustness in Preparation for Extreme-Weather-Related Adverse Water Quality Events

2023· article· en· W4366484353 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kirti S. Nemani, Sigrid Peldszus, Peter M. Huck

Bibliographic record

VenueACS ES&T Water · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceTurbidityEnvironmental scienceReliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringBusinessEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robustness is the ability of a drinking water treatment plant (DWTP) to achieve the desired finished water quality even during adverse raw water quality events. Increasing the robustness of a DWTP is beneficial for regular operations and especially for extreme weather adaptation. This paper proposes three robustness frameworks: (a) a general framework outlining the main steps and methodology for systematic assessment and improvement of the robustness of a DWTP, (b) a parameter-specific framework applying the general framework to a water quality parameter (WQP), and (c) a plant-specific framework applying the parameter-specific framework to a DWTP. A parameter-specific framework for turbidity is presented using the turbidity robustness index (TRI) for evaluation and applied to a full-scale DWTP in Ontario, Canada. This evaluation was conducted with historical plant data, as well as bench-scale experimental data simulating extremely high-turbidity scenarios. The framework application is capable of identifying (i) less robust processes which are likely to be vulnerable during climate extremes, (ii) operational responses to increasing short-term robustness, and (iii) a critical WQP threshold beyond which capital improvements are necessary. The proposed framework provides insights into the current state of robustness of a DWTP and serves as a tool for climate adaptation planning.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS ES&T WaterSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207