MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028727100

Estudo da qualidade de águas de poços no Iguape-CE

2015· article· en· W7028727100 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater supplyWater qualityPopulationQuality (philosophy)Non-revenue waterIndex (typography)Sewage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the United Nations (UN), the target of one of the objectives Development Goals of halving the number of people without access to water drinking was reached - however, 768 million people still do not enjoy this advance overall, especially in rural areas. In this context, the population of Iguape, a district of municipality of Aquiraz-EC, is part of this minority, lacking sewage and supply for water distribution network. Thus, a study was performed to During the year 2013 with the objective of determining if the water wells used by population - the main source of those goods - was in accordance with the parameters of potability provided for in the regulations. The results show that for the plurality of wells human consumption have parameters outside the limits accepted by the existing laws - presence of E. coli, for example. As a reference for this study the Quality Index Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment was employed to facilitate the Understanding of the data set and revealed that the ten wells monitored only one presents water quality rated as Good

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmericanae (AECID Library)Same topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207