MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410514858 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.200405

Assessment of Pollution Risks in the Kufa River Using Water Quality Indices and Principal Component Analysis

2025· article· en· W4410514858 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Resources and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal component analysisEnvironmental sciencePollutionWater qualityWater resource managementQuality (philosophy)River pollutionEnvironmental engineeringStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Kufa River, located in Al-Najaf Province, plays a vital role in the local community by supplying water primarily for irrigation and drinking purposes.This study aims to evaluate the water quality of the Euphrates River, specifically along a 42 km stretch through Al-Najaf, using a Water Quality Index (WQI), multivariate statistical methods, and geospatial techniques.Seventeen water quality parameters and five heavy metals were measured to calculate both the Arithmetic Water Quality Index (WQI) and the Integrated Water Quality Index (IWQI).The concentration of cations followed the order Na+ K+ Ca+ Mg+, while anions were ranked NO Cl HCO SO.The results revealed significant spatial variation in IWQI values, ranging from poor to unsuitable, with water quality deteriorating from upstream to downstream locations.IWQI scores indicated that water quality ranged from poor to unsuitable at all seven sampling sites, with average values of 215.98 and 295.35 based on Iraqi (IQ) and World Health Organization (WHO) standards, respectively, thereby confirming the extent of water quality deterioration.In addition, heavy metal contamination was evaluated using the Heavy Metal Pollution Index (HPI) and the Heavy Metal Evaluation Index (HEI).For irrigation purposes, parameters including Electrical Conductivity (EC), Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR), and Soluble Sodium Percentage (SSP) were assessed.While most samples were categorized as permissible, two sites were classified as good based on their lower salinity levels.Statistical analysis, including Principal Component Analysis (PCA), revealed that four major factors influence water quality: organic pollution, dissolved oxygen (DO), magnesium levels, and alkalinity.The proximity of sampling sites to wastewater treatment plants and agricultural zones contributed to elevated pollutant concentrations, whereas upstream areas were primarily affected by domestic sewage.The study emphasizes the severe water quality degradation in the Kufa River.This study provides valuable insights for pollution control and sustainable water resource management in the Kufa River.By identifying heavily polluted sites such as S3 and S5 and highlighting key contaminants like cadmium and phosphate, the study offers a clear understanding of priority areas for intervention.The use of IWQI and PCA helped show spatial pollution patterns, guiding directed improvements such as real-time monitoring, enhanced wastewater treatment, and better regulation of pollution sources.These findings aim to support informed decisions and long-term strategies for water quality protection in the region.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.303 · 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