MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971192624 · doi:10.1029/2005gl023860

Predominance of industrial Pb in recent snow (1994–2004) and ice (1842–1996) from Devon Island, Arctic Canada

2005· article· en· W1971192624 on OpenAlexaffabout
William Shotyk, Jiancheng Zheng, Michael Krachler, Christian Zdanowicz, Roy M. Koerner, David Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowArcticEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyThe arcticRadiogenic nuclideAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyOceanographyGeologyGeographyGeochemistryGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atmospheric Pb contamination was studied using snow and ice from the Canadian arctic. Forty‐five samples representing the past ten years of snow accumulation on Devon Island contain an average of 45.2 pg/g of Pb but only 0.43 pg/g of Sc. The average ratio of Pb to Sc (105) is far greater than that of soil‐derived dust particles (in the range 1 to 5) which indicates that ca. 95 to 99% of recent Pb is anthropogenic. Isotopic analyses ( 206 Pb, 207 Pb, 208 Pb) confirm that anthropogenic sources continue to dominate atmospheric Pb inputs. Unlike snow from Greenland which receives Pb predominantly from the U.S. ( 206 Pb/ 207 Pb ≈ 1.2), snow from Devon Island is less radiogenic ( 206 Pb/ 207 Pb ≈ 1.15). There are pronounced seasonal variations, and the snow samples containing the greatest Pb enrichments are from winter when the Arctic is dominated by air masses originating in Eurasia. While the elimination of gasoline lead additives in Europe, North America and Japan has helped to reduce Pb emissions during the past two to three decades, aerosols in the Arctic today are still highly contaminated by industrial Pb.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations97
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207