PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF SPRINKLERS (MINI AND MICRO) UNDER USING TREATED WASTE WATER FOR LANDSCAPE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of two sprinkler types,mini and micro, type order to identify the best operating circumstances for achieving high application efficiency. The application efficiency of low quarter (AELQ), distribution uniformity (DU), and coefficient of uniformity (CU) were assessed at varying operating pressure (100, 150, and 200 kPa) and riser height (30, 50, and 80 cm). In order to prevent water loss and reduce the cost of the irrigation system, it was determined that the operating conditions that produced the highest coefficient of uniformity, distribution uniformity, and application efficiency of the low quarter were an operating pressure of 150 kPa and riser heights of 80 cm for mini sprinklers and 50 cm for micro sprinklers. When using treated waste water in a landscape irrigation system, the distribution uniformity values for micro sprinklers are higher than those for mini sprinklers under the same operating pressure and riser height conditions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".