New model of long-term changes in spatiotemporal patterns of water quality across Shatt-Al-Arab River by applying GIS technique, from 1976 to 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Using a combination of the geographical information system (GIS) and the Canadian water quality index (WQI), the current study sought to provide a long-term general assessment of the water quality of the Shatt Al-Arab River (SAAR), focusing on its suitability for living organisms. Likewise, SPSS statistics was used to develop a nonlinear WQI regression model for the study area. Design/methodology/approach The study required four decades of data collection on some environmental characteristics of river water. After that, calculate the WQI and conduct the spatial analysis. Eight variables in total, including water temperature, dissolved oxygen, potential hydrogen ions, electrical conductivity (EC), biological oxygen demand, turbidity, nitrate and phosphate, were chosen to calculate the WQI. Findings Throughout the study periods, the WQI values varied from 55.2 to 79.83, falling into the categories of four (marginal) and three (fair), with the sixth period (2007–2008) showing the most decline. The present research demonstrated that the high concentration of phosphates, the high EC values, and minor changes in the other environmental factors are the major causes of the decline in water quality. The variations in ecological variables' overlap are a senior contributor to changes in water quality in general. Notably, using GIS in conjunction with the WQI has shown to be very effective in reducing the time and effort spent on investigating water quality while obtaining precise findings and information at the lowest possible expense. Calibration and validation of the developed model showed that this model had a perfect estimate of the WQI value. Due to its flexibility and impartiality, this study recommends using the proposed model to estimate and predict the WQI in the study area. Originality/value Even though the water quality of the SAAR has been the subject of numerous studies, this is the only long-term investigation that has been done to evaluate and predict its water quality.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".