MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Explore the Monitoring Status of Black and Odorous Water

2025· article· en· W4412642292 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMATEC Web of Conferences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black and odorous water bodies caused by industrial pollution, agricultural runoff and urban wastewater pose environmental and public health risks. Traditional monitoring methods are both time and labour consuming limitations, which is unsuitable for large-scale assessments. Remote sensing has emerged as a new monitoring technology using spectral analysis and machine learning techniques to detect polluted water bodies with accuracy of 87.5%. This study examines the formation mechanisms of black-odorous water based on odorzing and blackening process. It also compares advantages and limitations of both traditional monitoring techniques and modern remote sensing methods. Challenges on remote sensing monitoring including atmospheric effect and ground effect decrease its accuracy, but future advancements in high-resolution satellite imaging, cloud-masking techniques and next generation machine learning model have potential to overcome those challenges. Stricter pollution regulations are also necessary to enhance water quality management. Strengthening these efforts is essential for sustainable urban development and environmental protection.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · 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