<b>Water quality assessment of Bheemasandra Lake, South India: A blend of water quality indices, multivariate data mining techniques and GIS</b>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An integrated approach combining water quality indices (WQIs), multivariate data mining, and spatial interpolation techniques was employed to examine the water quality of Bheemasandra Lake, located adjacent to a sewage treatment plant (STP) in Tumakuru city, India. The analysis of 22 lake water samples, examined before and after the monsoons, revealed that the values of 10 of 20 physicochemical parameters namely — electrical conductivity, biochemical oxygen demand, turbidity, total dissolved solids, ammoniacal nitrogen, nitrates, magnesium, total hardness, total alkalinity and calcium (noted only before the monsoon) — exceeded the acceptable limits stipulated by national and international standards. The Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment WQI (pre-monsoon: 25.3; post-monsoon: 33.9) and Weighted Arithmetic WQI (pre-monsoon: 3398; post-monsoon: 2093) designated the water as unsafe for drinking. Irrigation WQIs (sodium adsorption ratio, sodium percentage, residual sodium carbonate, magnesium hazard, permeability index, and potential salinity) implied water’s suitability for irrigation. However, electrical conductivity indicated otherwise. Industrial WQIs (Larson–Skold Index, Langelier Index, Aggressive Index, and Puckorius Scaling Index) illustrated scaling propensity and the chloride sulphate mass ratio alluded galvanic corrosion potential. Hierarchical cluster analysis gathered 22 sampling points into two clusters (cluster 1: relatively lower polluted regions; Cluster 2: highly polluted regions) for each season based on similarities in water features. Principal component analysis extracted four (79.07% cumulative variance) and six (87.14% cumulative variance) principal components before and after the monsoons, respectively. These components identified the primary pollution sources as urban sewage and natural lithological processes. WQI maps, created using the inverse distance weighted interpolation technique, enhanced the visualization of spatial–temporal variations. This study highlights the dire consequences of urbanization, STP pollution and sewage management failures, necessitating that concerned authorities should implement policies and measures to curb the negative impacts on the environment and public health.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.009 | 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 teacher head, 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".