MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Monitoring of Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) in Treated Water from Distribution System

2024· preprint· en· W4405887825 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Augustine Chung Wei Yap, Nurul Huda binti Che Isa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlate countHeterotrophEnvironmental scienceDistribution (mathematics)OceanographyMathematicsGeologyPaleontologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterotrophic plate count (HPC) is a method that enumerates the total number of viable heterotrophs whichinclude bacteria, yeasts and molds. In water quality monitoring, it is performed to measure changes in the microbiological diversity in water treatment and distribution systems, as well as recreational waters and drinking water. It can also indicate risk of other pathogens’ regrowth in water and biofilm formation. Althoughthe Japanese water quality guideline recommends limit of HPC <100 CFU/mL and Canadian & US guidelines of<500 CFU/mL,the reporting of this parameter has not been developed by the Ministry of Health, Malaysia for treated water. Therefore,this study aimed at establishing a monitoring programme for the enumeration of HPC in treated water from distribution system using the ready-to-useCompact Dry AQ media via membrane filtration method. Out of 178 selected treated water samples, only 3 samples showed HPC positive and their counts were between 6 - 21 CFU/100mL, which were below the recommended limits. Hence, it can be suggested that the water treatment and disinfection performance at water treatment processes were adequate during the monitoring period, which further ensures clean and safe water supply to consumers.Further works that can be proposedinclude resampling and retesting of targeted repeating positive HPC sampling points. Meanwhile, other sampling points from different locations may also be included in future monitoring programme.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207