An Automated Technique for Measuring δD and δ<sup>18</sup>O Values of Porewater by Direct CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub> Equilibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stable-oxygen and -hydrogen isotopic values (deltaD, delta18O) of porewater in geologic media are commonly determined on water obtained by extraction techniques such as centrifugation, mechanical squeezing, vacuum heating and cryogenic microdistillation, and azeotropic distillation. Each of these techniques may cause isotopic fractionation as part the extraction process and each is laborious. Here we demonstrate a new approach to obtain automated, high-precision deltaD and delta18O measurements of porewater in geologic sediments by direct H2- and CO2-porewater equilibration using a modified commercial CO2-water equilibrator. This technique provides an important and cost-effective improvement over current extraction methods, because many samples can be rapidly analyzed with minimal handling, thereby reducing errors and potential for isotopic fractionation. The precision and accuracy of direct H2- and CO2-porewater equilibration is comparable to or better than current porewater extraction methods. Finally, the direct equilibration technique allows investigators to obtain high-resolution (cm scale) porewater deltaD and delta18O profiles using cores from individual boreholes, eliminating the need for costly piezometers or conventional porewater extractions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".