MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117166872 · doi:10.1016/j.wroa.2025.100475

Using “big data” and non-linear machine learning to infer groundwater contamination mechanisms across a spatially extensive, geologically heterogeneous region

2025· article· en· W7117166872 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ioan Petculescu, Anna Majury, R. Stephen Brown, Kevin McDermott, Paul Hynds

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Research X · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAquiferGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)ContaminationGroundwater rechargeWater qualityHydrogeologyFecal coliform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• First non-linear, big data contamination index model with associated partial effect plots • High goodness-of-fit (91.9%) non- E. coli coliform model, linked to groundwater recharge • Summer rainfall “tipping point” (3mm/day) may induce runoff and/or aquifer dilution • Deep wells and bedrock aquifers associated (p < 0.0001) with localized contamination • Microbial concentrations and NEC: E. coli ratio complement traditional quality metrics Groundwater accounts for approximately 98% of available freshwater, with >2 billion people relying on it as a primary drinking water source. Notwithstanding its importance, specific groundwater quality parameters - namely microbial concentrations and non- E. coli coliforms (NEC) - remain understudied. The current study sought to address this gap by modelling three distinct Contamination Indices (CI) corresponding to E. coli concentration, NEC concentration, and the NEC: E. coli concentration ratio. CIs were developed for south Ontario (115,693 km 2 ) using ∼1 million samples from ∼290,000 wells collected between 2010 and 2021. To permit modelling, CIs were linked to 50 subregion-specific variables which impact groundwater quality (e.g., well depth, aquifer type, mean daily precipitation volumes); Generalized Additive Models (GAM) were subsequently developed and associated non-linear partial effects were calculated. Findings suggest NEC concentrations may appropriately indicate a source’s long-term potential for generalized contamination, as the NEC model exhibited high deviance explained (91.9%) due to significant associations (p < 0.05) with factors influencing and/or representing groundwater recharge. A daily summer rainfall “tipping point” was identified, with volumes >3mm being associated with NEC concentration reductions (p < 0.0001), potentially due to subsoil saturation and/or aquifer contamination dilution. Regions with predominantly deep wells in bedrock aquifers were associated (p < 0.0001) with low NEC: E. coli ratios, i.e., localized contamination mechanisms (e.g., contaminant bypass or short-circuiting) likely dominate in these regions. The presumption that deeper aquifers/wells are “safer” may thus be due for reconsideration. The importance of understanding and inferring contamination mechanisms cannot be overstated, as it serves as a foundation for evidence-based source protection and testing recommendations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Research XSame topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207