Assessing the Probable Sources Affecting the Water Quality Index of the Panch Prayag Belt of Uttarakhand, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Water Quality Index (WQI) is an essential metric for evaluating the usability of surface water resources, particularly in ecologically sensitive and high-demand areas like the Panch Prayag belt of Uttarakhand, India. This region, comprising five major pilgrimage towns—Devaprayag, Nandprayag, Vishnuprayag, Karnaprayag, and Rudraprayag—faces seasonal fluctuations in water quality due to both natural and anthropogenic pressures. In this study, water samples were collected from 2021 to 2023 across pre-monsoon, monsoon, and post-monsoon seasons, and the WQI was computed using the Canadian Water Quality Index (CWQI 1.0). Results revealed that WQI values ranged from 36 to 45 across locations and seasons, with lower values during dry seasons due to increased contaminant concentrations. Regression analysis using ANOVA identified magnesium, chloride, nitrate, and fluoride as key pollutants significantly influencing WQI (F-values > 10 in some locations, with p-values < 0.05), with location-wise R² values ranging from 75.6% (Vishnuprayag) to 93.1% (Rudraprayag). Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models were employed for predictive analysis, achieving high accuracy with R² values exceeding 0.91 and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) below 0.6. The ANN model demonstrated a strong ability to forecast WQI trends, reinforcing its potential for real-time water quality monitoring. The study provides critical insights into pollution sources and seasonal dynamics, supporting sustainable water resource management in this culturally and environmentally vital region.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".