Adaptative water quality management in water distribution systems by optimizing control valves and chlorination booster stations
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
Good water quality in a water distribution system (WDS) can be reached by using flow control valves (FCV) to reduce water residence time (WRT), and chlorine booster stations to maintain acceptable free residual chlorine concentrations (FRCC). The research developed a cost-effective, adaptative approach for managing FCV and chlorine booster stations, while maintaining acceptable pressure and FRCC ranges. The methodology is applied to a real full-scale case study considering three optimization formulations: 1) FCV operation, 2) chlorine booster station operation, and 3) combining them in an adaptive management strategy. Results revealed that chlorine booster stations individually or combined with FCV enhanced water quality significantly at an acceptable cost, while FCV optimization alone or combined with chlorine booster stations reduced WRT by, at most, 3.8%. Chlorine booster stations were thus more effective than FCV in this case study. This formulation can be applied to other WDS to improve water quality cost-effectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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