MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982268248 · doi:10.1139/s05-006

Aqueous phase arsenic in weathered shale enriched in native arsenic

2005· article· en· W1982268248 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tracy Daniel. Muloin, M. J. Dudas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicArsenic contamination and mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArsenicOil shaleArsenateEnvironmental chemistryChemistryAdsorptionWeatheringDesorptionSulfideArseniteSulfide mineralsIron sulfidePyriteGeologySulfurMineralogyGeochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soils and geologic deposits derived from marine shale often contain elevated levels of arsenic. The source of arsenic is iron sulfide minerals. Oxidative weathering breaks down the iron sulfide minerals and potentially releases undesirable levels of arsenic into the surrounding pore water. Equilibration experiments on a weathered marine shale containing naturally elevated levels of native arsenic and on a mixture of weathered shale and calcareous till were conducted under aerobic conditions to determine how much arsenic was released into pore water and the mechanism responsible for limiting soluble arsenic concentrations. Aqueous phase arsenic released from the shale was less than 10 µg/L for aerobic conditions. Soluble arsenic concentrations were low considering the high total As concentrations in the shale (30 µg As/g shale). Over 4 times as much solution arsenic was released from the higher pH shale–till mixture compared to the acid shale alone. Adsorption and desorption was the mechanism that controlled the concentration of aqueous phase arsenic. Key words: soluble arsenate, groundwater, solution chemistry, adsorption, background concentration.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicArsenic contamination and mitigationFrench-language works237,207