Predicting microbial water quality in on-site water reuse systems with online sensors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Widespread implementation of on-site water reuse is hindered by the limited availability of monitoring approaches that ensure microbial quality during operation. In this study, we developed a methodology for monitoring microbial water quality in on-site water reuse systems using inexpensive and commercially available online sensors. An extensive dataset containing sensor and microbial water quality data for six of the most critical types of disruptions in membrane bioreactors with chlorination was collected. We then tested the ability of three typological machine learning algorithms - logistic regression, support-vector machine, and random forest - to predict the microbial water quality as "safe" or "unsafe" for reuse. The main criteria for model optimization was to ensure a low false positive rate (FPR) - the percentage of safe predictions when the actual condition is unsafe - which is essential to protect users health. This resulted in enforcing a fixed FPR ≤ 2%. Maximizing the true positive rate (TPR) - the percentage of safe predictions when the actual condition is safe - was given second priority. Our results show that logistic-regression-based models using only two out of the six sensors (free chlorine and oxidation-reduction potential) achieved the highest TPR. Including sensor slopes as engineered features allowed to reach similar TPRs using only one sensor instead of two. Analysis of the occurrence of false predictions showed that these were mostly early alarms, a characteristic that could be regarded as an asset in alarm management. In conclusion, the simplest algorithm in combination with only one or two sensors performed best at predicting the microbial water quality. This result provides useful insights for water quality modeling or for applications where small datasets are a common challenge and a general advantage might be gained by using simpler models that reduce the risk of overfitting, allow better interpretability, and require less computational power.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".