MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095084186

An Investigation of the Sources of Fecal

2008· article· en· W7095084186 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geography and Cartography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecal coliformFecesBacteroidesIndicator bacteriaHuman fecesBathingAnaerobic bacteriaPollution
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

to investigate the source of fecal pollution responsible for beach postings at Petrie Island Beach near the City of Ottawa in 2007. Field observations and water samples were collected weekly at the Beach and at upstream Ottawa River locations from May 7 to October 15, 2007. Water samples were analyzed for E. coli, and detection of a DNA marker for anaerobic Bacteroides bacteria associated with human fecal pollution. Field observations found evidence of fecal contamination at Petrie Island Beach from both bird and human fecal sources. Bird droppings were numerous at some places, although their role in beach postings or human health risks remains uncertain. Observation of floatables on the beach at times, was indicative of the impacts of human fecal pollution. E. coli concentrations at Petrie Island Beach were higher in the sand than in the adjacent beach water, and they increased in the sand and beach water over the course of the bathing season. These results are consistent with other studies that have found sand serving as a reservoir for E. coli. The human Bacteroides DNA marker was detected in 26 % of the beach water samples from Petrie Island Beach in 2007. Both E. coli concentrations and the occurrence of the human Bacteroides DNA marker were

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical Geography and CartographyFrench-language works237,207