MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008970178 · doi:10.1002/sia.3122

Effect of sodium dithionite on the surface composition of iron‐containing aquifer sediment

2009· article· en· W2008970178 on OpenAlexaff
M. A. Langell, E. Kadossov, Hardiljeet K. Boparai, Patrick J. Shea

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface and Interface Analysis · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOffice of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
KeywordsDithioniteSodium dithioniteSedimentX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyChemistryEnvironmental chemistryIron sulfideAdsorptionEnvironmental remediationSulfideComposition (language)SulfurInorganic chemistryContaminationGeologyChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract AES, XPS and SIMS analyses were used to characterize the surface of Pantex aquifer sediment under pretreatment conditions previously shown to activate the sediment for remediation of the explosives‐contaminated aquifer. The untreated sediment contains detectable concentrations of iron, but the composition is heterogeneous and the nature of the iron at the surface is poorly defined. Treatment with dithionite (Na 2 S 2 O 4 ) produced Fe 3 O 4 ‐like material, as evidenced by characteristic Fe 2p XPS structure. Sediment treated with buffered dithionite (pH = 8.8) shows a higher Fe 2+ /Fe 3+ ratio and retains strongly adsorbed FeS‐like surface species even after copious washing with deionized water. The negative SIMS data indicate that, in the absence of the K 2 CO 3 buffer, the dithionite treatment places relatively little sulfur onto the surface, but requires the higher buffered pH to form sulfide and sulfates. Detection of Fe 3 O 4 and FeS on the sediment surface after dithionite treatment supports the effectiveness of this treatment in remediating contaminated aquifer sediment. SIMS and XPS indicate that treating with buffered dithionite also results in some loss of iron from the sediment surface. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface and Interface AnalysisSame topicEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterialsFrench-language works237,207