MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W201098474 · doi:10.3133/wri004145

Cross-hole radar scanning of two vertical, permeable, reactive-iron walls at the Massachusetts Military Reservation, Cape Cod, Massachusetts

2001· report· en· W201098474 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Air ForceUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Connecticut
KeywordsPlumePanacheBoreholeGround-penetrating radarGeologyEnvironmental scienceRadarHydrology (agriculture)MeteorologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pilot-scale study was conducted by the U.S. Army National Guard (USANG) at the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR) on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, to assess the use of a hydraulic-fracturing method to create vertical, permeable walls of zero-valent iron to passively remediate ground water contaminated with chlorinated solvents. The study was conducted near the source area of the Chemical Spill-10 (CS-10) plume, a plume containing chlorinated solvents that underlies the MMR. Ground-water contamination near the source area extends from about 24 m (meters) to 35 m below land surface. The USANG designed two reactive-iron walls to be 12 m long and positioned 24 to 37 m below land surface to intersect and remediate part of the CS-10 plume.Because iron, as an electrical conductor, absorbs electromagnetic energy, the US Geological Survey used a cross-hole common-depth, radar scanning method to assess the continuity and to estimate the lateral and vertical extent of the two reactive-iron walls. The cross-hole radar surveys were conducted in boreholes on opposite sides of the iron injection zones using electric-dipole antennas with dominant center frequencies of 100 and 250 MHz. Significant decreases in the radar-pulse amplitudes observed in scans that traversed the injection zones were interpreted by comparing field data to results of two-dimensional finite-difference time-domain numerical models and laboratory-scale physical models.The numerical and physical models simulate a wall of perfectly conducting material embedded in saturated sand. Results from the numerical and physical models show that the amplitude of the radar pulse transmitted across the edge of a conductive wall is about 43 percent of the amplitude of a radar pulse transmitted across background material. The amplitude of a radar pulse transmitted through a hole in a conductive wall increases as the aperture of the hole increases. The modeling results indicate that holes with an aperture of less than 40 percent of the dominant wavelength of the radar pulse are not likely to be detected.Based on the results of the numerical and physical modeling, the decreases in radar-pulse amplitudes observed in scans traversing the injection zones are interpreted as electrically conductive zones that outline the distribution of iron. The area interpreted as iron in the northern A-wall contains two zones -- an upper zone about 10 m wide, extending from about 25 to 31 m below land surface, and a lower zone about 8 m wide, extending from 31.5 to 34.5 m below land surface. The area interpreted as iron in the southern B-wall is about 9 m wide, extending from about 27 to 34.5 m below land surface. No discrete holes were interpreted in either the A- or B-wall zones.The interpretation of the field data suggests that (1) the hydraulic-fracturing method introduced iron into the subsurface, but not in the dimensions originally proposed; (2) the iron within the treatment zones is distributed in a generally continuous manner; and (3) excluding the discontinuity in the A-wall, holes within the iron treatment zone, if any, exist at scales smaller than about 10 cm, the resolution limit of the radar antennas and acquisition geometry used for this study. The cross-hole radar method appears to have been an effective method for delineating the distribution of iron in the two walls; however, the veracity of the results cannot be ascertained without excavation or drilling into the treatment zone.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207