MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414481817 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.127217

Non-contact hyperspectral monitoring of urban wastewater quality: Optimization of model calibration and performance

2025· article· en· W4414481817 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Lechevallier, Weitang Zhu, Baiqian Shi, David McCarthy, Jörg Rieckermann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersHorizon 2020Monash UniversityHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichSouth East Water
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingStormwaterPartial least squares regressionTurbidityPollutantCalibrationPollutionWastewaterNonpoint source pollution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring pollution in urban drainage systems (UDS) is challenging due to their inaccessibility and harsh conditions. Reflectance spectrophotometry has emerged as a promising non-contact technique, but prior studies have largely focused on synthetic wastewaters or single sites. In this work, we evaluate visible and near-infrared hyperspectral imaging for monitoring of turbidity, dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and ammonium nitrogen (NH 4 -N) in raw urban wastewater. We collected samples from five locations, including a stormwater sewer, two foul sewers, and two combined sewers. We used partial least squares regression models to predict pollutants from hyperspectral data. For model calibration, we explored three approaches: local models trained with five to thirty samples from a single site, global models trained on data from all sites but one, and hybrid models combining global models with two to twenty site-specific samples to enhance accuracy. Model performance is in general best for foul sewers, followed by the stormwater sewer, while it is worst for more variable combined sewers. Local calibrations with thirty training samples perform best, with cross-validated median errors of 6.5 % for turbidity, 14.1 % for DOC, and 22.3 % for NH 4 -N. Global models perform satisfactorily only for turbidity, with a median error of 11.8 %. We also showed that model performance for turbidity can be explained by its correlation with reflected light intensity, while performance for DOC and NH 4 -N can mainly be explained by their correlations with turbidity. Overall, these findings demonstrate the potential of (hyper)spectral imaging for low-maintenance, non-contact monitoring of key pollutants in urban drainage systems. • Hyperspectral imaging and data-driven modeling are used to predict water pollutants. • Partial least squares models trained with 30 samples are optimal. • Best models have an accuracy of 6 %, 14 %, and 22 % for turbidity, DOC, and NH 4 -N. • Global models trained with data from four sites predict turbidity at new sites (12 %). • Model performances are higher for less variable foul sewers than combined sewers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
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 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental ManagementSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207