Water Quality Assessment of the Tigris River in Baghdad Using the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index (CCME-WQI)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess the water quality of the Tigris River in Baghdad and its northern areas through the application of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index (CCME-WQI). The study was conducted over two distinct periods representing dry (summer) and wet (winter) seasons over a 12-month period in 2021, encompassing nine strategic sampling sites along the river from Al-Karkh to Al-Wihda. Water samples were analyzed for sixteen physicochemical parameters including turbidity, alkalinity, total hardness, major ions, nutrients, and trace metals. The study revealed that water quality ranged from poor to marginal across all sampling locations, with CCME-WQI values varying between 42.1 and 56.03 during the dry period and 42.8 to 54.97 during the wet period. The findings highlight significant spatial and seasonal variations in water quality, demonstrating the severity of anthropogenic pressures on the Tigris River. This study concludes that immediate implementation of wastewater treatment, stricter pollution control, and continuous monitoring programs are urgently needed to safeguard this vital freshwater resource that supports more than 10 million inhabitants of Baghdad.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 it