MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994927137 · doi:10.1139/t02-051

Effect of permeating solutions on complex permittivity of compacted clay

2002· article· en· W1994927137 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
R. Kerry Rowe, Julie Q. Shang, Y Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPermittivitySoil waterDielectricChemistryDielectric permittivityContaminationRelative permittivitySoil scienceMineralogyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Inorganic chemistryMaterials scienceEnvironmental chemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complex permittivity of a natural clayey till (Halton Till) is measured before and after permeating with four different ionic contaminant solutions (CaCl 2 , MgCl 2 , NaCl, and acetic acid) to examine the effects of contaminant type and concentration on the complex permittivity of contaminated soil. The complex permittivity at 250 MHz is most sensitive to the concentration of the ions in the pore fluid, and a good linear correlation is obtained between the real and the imaginary parts of the complex permittivity and the concentrations of the anions, including chloride and acetate. These anions are distinguished by their own unique relationships for the simple solutions examined. Linear relationships also exist between the real and the imaginary parts of the complex permittivity and all of the cation species in the simple chloride salt solutions, namely Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ , and Na + . The results provide the evidence that the complex permittivity of soils may be used to identify changes in soil pore-water chemistry. As such, it may have potential for use in the detection of soil contamination.Key words: environmental, dielectric, detection, contamination, waste management.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207