MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969432693 · doi:10.1071/ch13012

Critical Review of Water Radiolysis Processes, Dissociation Products, and Possible Impacts on the Local Environment: A Geochemist’s Perspective

2013· article· en· W1969432693 on OpenAlex
Soumya Das

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiolysisChemistryRadicalDissociation (chemistry)Radiation chemistryHydroxideSelf-ionization of waterPhotochemistryHydrogenIonizing radiationInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryChemical reactionIrradiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiolysis of water is the process whereby water dissociates due to various types of ionizing radiation (a, ß, and ?) into hydrogen and hydroxide radicals (instead of hydrogen and hydroxide ions as in ionization). During radiolysis, water breaks down to highly reactive radicals such as •OH, •H, eaq–, HO2, and O2–• and molecular species such as H2, O2, and H2O2. Yields of these dissociation products are largely dependent on factors including the type of radiation, vapour pressure of the system, and linear energy transfer. These dissociated radicals are highly reactive and can affect the local environment by changing redox conditions and, in turn, inducing and enhancing metal mobility in the environment. This article reviews the process of water radiolysis, dissociation products, and possible effects on the environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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