MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406189864 · doi:10.33003/fjs-2024-0806-2853

EVALUATION OF THE GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN GISHIRI VILLAGE – KATAMPE, ABUJA USING WATER QUALITY INDEX

2024· article· en· W4406189864 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aliyu Adamu Dandajeh, E. M. Shaibu-Imodagbe, Samson Igbebe

Bibliographic record

VenueFUDMA Journal of Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Quality (philosophy)GroundwaterWater qualityWater resource managementEnvironmental scienceGeographyGeologyComputer scienceGeotechnical engineeringEcologyBiologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water quality is inherently linked with human health, poverty reduction, food security, livelihoods, preservation of ecosystems, economic growth, and social development of societies. This study evaluated the groundwater quality of Gishiri-Katampe, Abuja-Nigeria using statistical and geospatial techniques for water quality indexing. The study also used hydro-chemical parameters, geographical information, and statistical analysis to assess groundwater pollution potential; identify the most vulnerable areas, and generate a groundwater quality map. The Canadian Water Quality Index, the GIS mapping of the water quality of Gishiri indicates that the Water Quality Index is within the range of 76.87 to 92.53. Similarly, the WQI is predominantly good (62%), indicating a minor degree of threat. However, 38% of the area is occasionally threatened (fair) on the Canadian scale. However, some areas are occasionally threatened (fair) with the corresponding WQI of 28% within the study area. Moreover, out of the 11 water quality parameters analyzed, 6 parameters (dissolved oxygen DO, turbidity, chemical oxygen demand COD, NO3, Na, and biological oxygen demand BOD) were identified as significant parameters as indicated by the correlation and regression analysis. This suggested that they strongly influenced the variability of the 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 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)0.029
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFUDMA Journal of SciencesSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207