MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965916866 · doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2008-1-285

SOURCE IDENTIFICATION OF SPILLED DIESEL USING DIAGNOSTIC SESQUITERPANES AND DIAMONDOIDS

2008· article· en· W1965916866 on OpenAlexaff
Zhendi Wang, Chun Yang, Bruce P. Hollebone, Carl E. Brown, Mike Landriault

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiamondoidOil spillSample (material)Fuel oilEnvironmental scienceIdentification (biology)ChromatographyChemistryEngineeringWaste managementEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Examination of GC-MS chromatograms of bicyclic biomarker sesquiterpanes and diamondoids using their characteristic fragment ions provides another highly diagnostic means for correlation and differentiation of unknown spilled oil samples that are difficult to identify by current fingerprinting techniques. In this work, GC-FID and GC-MS fingerprinting analysis in conjunction with statistical data analysis of target oil hydrocarbons including sesquiterpanes and diamondoids was performed for identification of an unknown oil spill incident occurred in a harbor of the Netherlands in 2004. Forensic investigation included the: (1) identification and characterization of numerous sesquiterpanes and diamondoids; (2) comparison of the distribution of sesquiterpanes and diamondoids; (3) development of a series of diagnostic indices for correlation and differentiation of spilled fuel samples; and (4) use of “Two-tailed” unpaired Student'S t-test to statistically evaluate the imperceptible differences between the selected diagnostic ratios of target compounds in the spill fuel and the suspected source fuel samples. At a 95% confidence interval, 33 of all 38 diagnostic indices (among them, 20 are diagnostic indices of sesquiterpanes and diamondoids) show positive matches between spill sample and suspected source fuel sample 1. In comparison, only 5 of 38 diagnostic indices indicate positive matches between spill sample and suspected source sample 3. These evidences demonstrate that the bunker ship has the responsibility for this oil spill incident.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207