A methodology for integrating time-lagged rainfall and river flow data into machine learning models to improve prediction of quality parameters of raw water supplying a treatment plant
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rainfall and increased river flow can deteriorate raw water (RW) quality parameters such as turbidity and UV absorbance at 254 nm. This study aims to develop a methodology for integrating both time-lagged watershed rainfall and river flow data into machine learning models of the quality of RW supplying a drinking water treatment plant (DWTP). Spearman's rank non-parametric cross-correlation analyses were performed using both river flow and rain in the watershed and RW data from the water intake. Then, RW turbidity and RW UV254 were modelled, using a support vector regression (SVR) and an artificial neural network (ANN) under several prediction scenarios with time-lagged variables. River flow presented a very strong correlation with RW quality, whereas rainfall showed a moderate correlation. Time lags with maximum correlations between flow data and turbidity were a few hours, while for UV254, they were between 2 and 4 days, demonstrating varied time lags and a complex behaviour. The best performing scenario was the one that used time-lagged watershed rainfall and river flow as input data. The ANN performed better for both turbidity and UV254 than SVR. Results from this study suggest the possibility for new modelling strategies and more accurate chemical dosing for the removal of key contaminants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it