MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analytical Models for the Design of Iron-Based Permeable Reactive Barriers

2005· article· en· W2009349969 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsFlow (mathematics)Boundary value problemGroundwaterDispersion (optics)Set (abstract data type)Groundwater flowMathematical optimizationPermeable reactive barrierBoundary (topology)Applied mathematicsMechanicsComputer scienceEngineeringAquiferMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringContaminationPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The preliminary design of iron-based permeable reactive barriers is often accomplished using analytic expressions for one-dimensional groundwater flow and contaminant transport. Typically, one or more of the governing processes is simplified or neglected to facilitate development of a tractable solution. This paper presents a set of improved design equations that include the effects of dispersion, finite domain boundary, sequential decay, and production processes, and increased flow through high conductivity barriers. When applied to realistic example problems, application of the expanded design equations typically results in the specification of a larger permeable reactive barrier thickness than obtained using conventional approaches.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.180 · 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