Integration of Incomplete Mixing at Junctions of Water Distribution Networks in Contamination Source Identification Tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The water quality models used in contamination source identification (CSI) tools assume complete mixing at the junctions of drinking water distribution networks. Two extensions of the contamination status algorithm (CSA)—a CSI tool that employs water quality models in a reverse-time manner—were accordingly developed in this study, one assuming complete mixing (CSA-CMX) and the other assuming incomplete mixing (CSA-IMX) at cross-junctions. Both algorithms identified contamination sources based on the results of grab sampling at iteratively suggested locations. The performances of CSA-CMX and CSA-IMX were evaluated through laboratory experiments using three contamination identification problems: CSA-IMX identified the contamination source in all three problems, whereas CSA-CMX identified the contamination source in only one. Furthermore, the specificity (i.e., the ability to distinguish the real contamination source from other possible contamination sources) was higher for CSA-IMX than for CSA-CMX in two of the three problems. Therefore, the incomplete mixing assumption was confirmed to be a crucial factor in CSI tools.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".