Studying drinking water Quality in some quarters on the left side of the city of Mosul
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims to evaluate the quality of liquefaction water in the Andalus, Alsurta and Mohundissien quarters for drinking and domestic uses and to investigate the potential risks resulting from its pollution based on international standards using the Canadian model CCMEWQI and the comprehensive pollution model CPI. Both temperature and acid function (pH) were estimated., electrical conductivity EC25, dissolved oxygen in water DO, total hardness, total basicity, sodium ions Na, sulfates SO4, nitrates, fluorides and fecal coliform bacteria. The study found that the frequency of appearance of fecal coliform bacteria reached more than 16 cells. 100 ml-1, And the concentration of dissolved oxygen decreased in some periods, and the concentrations of fluoride ions were below the minimum limits calculated according to the climatic conditions of the city of Mosul, as their rates did not exceed (0.428 ± 0.071) mg. L-1, which causes health problems for consumers, while the rest of the characteristics studied were within the appropriate limits for drinking. As for the results of the mathematical models, the quality of the water studied was in the category of highly polluted water according to the CPI model, and bad quality water according to the Canadian model.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".