Groundwater quality in the Chemung River, Eastern Lake Ontario, and Lower Hudson River Basins, New York, 2013
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
First posted November 10, 2015 For additional information, contact: Director, New York Water Science Center U.S. Geological Survey 425 Jordan Road Troy, NY 12180-8349 Information requests: (518) 285-5602 or visit our Web site at: http://ny.water.usgs.gov In a study conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, water samples were collected from 4 production wells and 4 domestic wells in the Chemung River Basin, 8 production wells and 7 domestic wells in the Eastern Lake Ontario Basin, and 12 production wells and 13 domestic wells in the Lower Hudson River Basin (south of the Federal Lock and Dam at Troy) in New York. All samples were collected in June, July, and August 2013 to characterize groundwater quality in these basins. The samples were collected and processed using standard USGS procedures and were analyzed for 148 physiochemical properties and constituents, including dissolved gases, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, pesticides, volatile organic compounds, radionuclides, and indicator bacteria. The Chemung River Basin study area covers 1,744 square miles in south-central New York and encompasses the part of the Chemung River Basin that lies within New York. Two of the wells sampled in the Chemung River Basin are completed in sand and gravel, and 6 are completed in bedrock. Groundwater in the Chemung River Basin was generally of good quality, although properties and concentrations of some constituents—sodium, arsenic, aluminum, iron, manganese, radon-222, total coliform bacteria, and Escherichia coli bacteria—equaled or exceeded primary, secondary, or proposed drinking-water standards. The constituent most frequently detected in concentrations exceeding drinking-water standards (six of eight samples) was radon-222. The Eastern Lake Ontario Basin study area covers 3,225 square miles in north-central New York. The Eastern Lake Ontario Basin (between the Oswego River Basin and the St. Lawrence River Basin) includes the Mid-Northern Lake Ontario Basin, the Black River Basin, and the Chaumont River-Perch River Basin. Five of the wells sampled in the Eastern Lake Ontario Basin are completed in sand and gravel, and 10 are completed in bedrock. Groundwater in the Eastern Lake Ontario Basin was generally of good quality, although properties and concentrations of some constituents—color, pH, sodium, dissolved solids, fluoride, iron, manganese, uranium, gross-α radioactivity, radon-222, total coliform bacteria, and fecal coliform bacteria—equaled or exceeded primary, secondary, or proposed drinking-water standards. The constituent most frequently detected in concentrations exceeding drinking-water standards (10 of 15 samples) was radon-222. The Lower Hudson River Basin study area covers 5,607 square miles and encompasses the part of the Lower Hudson River Basin that lies within New York plus the parts of the Housatonic, Hackensack, Bronx, and Saugatuck River Basins that are in New York. Twelve of the wells sampled in the Lower Hudson River Basin are completed in sand-and-gravel deposits, and 13 are completed in bedrock. Groundwater in the Lower Hudson River Basin was generally of good quality, although properties and concentrations of some constituents—pH, sodium, chloride, dissolved solids, arsenic, aluminum, iron, manganese, radon-222, total coliform bacteria, fecal coliform bacteria, Escherichia coli bacteria, and heterotrophic plate count—equaled or exceeded primary, secondary, or proposed drinking-water standards. The constituent most frequently detected in concentrations exceeding drinking-water standards (20 of 25 samples) was radon-222.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».