MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390988749 · doi:10.1051/bioconf/20248702012

Pollution status of Aneuk Laot lake Sabang based on pollution index and saprobic index

2024· article· en· W4390988749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nurfadillah Nurfadillah, Seri Maulidawati, Riztania Anggraini, Cut Nanda Defira, Adli Waliul Perdana

Bibliographic record

VenueBIO Web of Conferences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutionEnvironmental scienceIndex (typography)Light pollutionHydrology (agriculture)Water qualityEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pollution that occurs in lake waters needs special attention from various parties in the management of the lake in the future. The activities occurring around the lake result in an increased inflow of pollution into the lake. The aim of this study is to assess the pollution condition of Lake Aneuk Laot in Sabang by utilizing indicators such as the pollution index, CCME WQI (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index), and saprobic index. The investigation took place in both September 2019 and June 2021, employing the stratified random sampling method with four designated observation stations for the sampling process. Parameter measurements analyzed in the pollution index include temperature, depth, current, TDS, TSS, BOD, COD, DO, phosphate, nitrate, ammonia, sulfide, iron, lead, oil and fat, detergent, pH, e-coliform, and parameters used in the saprobic index include phytoplankton data. Based on the analysis of the Pollution Index and CCME WQI it is determined that the pollution status of Lake Aneuk Laot is heavily polluted for Class I, moderately polluted for Classes 1 and 2, and falls under the good category for Class 4. The saprobic index results show the beta-mesosaprobic category with a result of 2.3 (moderately loaded).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBIO Web of ConferencesSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207