MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379160396 · doi:10.46632/jbab/1/3/7

Assessment of Water Quality in India’s Groundwater Sources Using the MOORA Method, Modified Drinking Water Quality Index (DWQI)

2023· article· en· W4379160396 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Purswani Khushbu

Bibliographic record

VenueREST Journal on Banking Accounting and Business · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Quality (philosophy)Water qualityGroundwaterEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementComputer scienceGeologyGeotechnical engineeringBiologyPhysicsWorld Wide WebEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2011, all groundwater using it as a source of drinking water in metropolitan regions of Iran were subjected to a novel "drinking water quality index (DWQI)" developed as "Modified DWQI" and based on the Canadian DWQI.The input parameters are modified in DWQI by having weighting factors applied.Twenty-three water quality characteristics and pertinent Iranian requirements for drinking water were chosen as model parameters and criterion, respectively, in the creation of the updated DWQI.The hyperparameters, the number of assessments throughout the dataset conveying the criteria, and thus the amount of deviation from the benchmarking in the violator observations are used to generate the adjusted DWQI for each sample location over the course of a year.The health-based index "Modified HWQI" and the acceptance index "Modified AWQI" are the two sub-indices that make up the modified DWQI.With a scale from 0 to 100, the updated DWQI and its subindices divide water quality into 5 categories: bad, marginal, fair, good, and excellent.The case study's findings showed that the adjusted DWQI, HWQI, and AWQI scores for groundwater resources across the country were, respectively, and that the overall water quality status in groundwater recharge was well described.This paper discusses various defuzzification techniques as well as how to compute the distance between the two fuzzy integers.The MOORA method's ratio structure and good reference approach can be applied in confusing settings by employing these techniques.The proposed adjustment makes the MOORA approach applicable to a wide range of real-world issues.An example of machining circuits designing process is taken into consideration to show the applicability and efficacy of the suggested approach.The alternatives are Albany, Bunbury, Perth and Geraldton.the Evaluation parameters are Mean TDS (ppm), Annual Range (ppm), Minimum (ppm) and Maximum (ppm).The final rank of this paper the Albany is got fourth rank, Bunbury is got third rank, Perth is got second rank, Geraldton is got first rank.The final result is done by using the MOORA method.

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 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.361
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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueREST Journal on Banking Accounting and BusinessSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207