2003 watershed protection plan update for the Wachusett Reservoir watershed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Watershed Management and the MWRA supply drinking water to 40 communities in the metropolitan Boston area.The Town of Clinton also draws water from Wachusett Reservoir, independent of the MWRA transmission and treatment system.Two communities near Wachusett Reservoir, Worcester and Leominster, may also withdraw water from the system for emergency supply.In addition, three communities west of Quabbin Reservoir obtain their water directly from this reservoir through the Chicopee Valley Aqueduct.MWRA is responsible for treatment and transmission, while BWM is responsible for collection and safe storage of water, protection of reservoir water quality, and management of the watersheds.Figure 1-1 presents a system schematic.Quabbin Reservoir, the Ware River, and Wachusett Reservoir are the active water supply sources for the metropolitan Boston water system.Ware River water is transferred seasonally to Quabbin Reservoir, while Quabbin Reservoir water is transferred regularly to Wachusett Reservoir through the Quabbin Aqueduct.Wachusett Reservoir is the terminal supply reservoir.Water is withdrawn through the Cosgrove intake at the eastern end of Wachusett Reservoir, and is carried by the Cosgrove Tunnel to the distribution system.The Wachusett Aqueduct provides redundancy to the Cosgrove Tunnel; it was used during the winter of 2003-2004 to allow connections to be made to MWRA's new Walnut Hill Treatment Plant.The Sudbury and Foss (Framingham #3) Reservoirs are the emergency reserve water supplies for this system.There are three emergency conditions that would require the use of the Sudbury System: 1 .)Wachusett Reservoir is declared non-potable; 2.) there is an inability to convey water from the Wachusett Reservoir to the MWRA system (e.g., failure of the Hultman Aqueduct, Southborough Tunnel, or the City Tunnel); or 3.) a serious drought occurs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".