MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038688178 · doi:10.1144/1467-7873/05-087

Smelter dust in humus around Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec

2006· article· en· W2038688178 on OpenAlexaffabout
R D Knight, P J Henderson

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumusSmeltingGeographyEnvironmental scienceChemistrySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microbeam analyses can be used to determine the morphology, texture, size and abundance of smelter dust trapped in humus. The geographic distribution of dust correlates with the geographic distribution of the geochemical signature of anthropogenic input to humus. Results of the study indicate that the observed dust may be classified into two morphotypes and five classes on the basis of differences in morphology, texture, size and chemistry. Dust observed at sizes larger than the maximum allowable emission size of modern electostatic precipitators suggests that part of the dust accumulation is historical. Most of the observed particles represent a resistant slag component whereas labile dust, often observed in emissions, is rarely present. A mass balance calculated for Fe indicates that smelter dust contributes a small fraction of the Fe in the humus compared to values determined by geochemical methods. Although emission of smelter-derived dust is probably the primary mechanism for delivery of metal to humus, the preserved particles are not the current primary residence site of metal in the humus. This suggests that, soon after deposition, weathering processes have released metals and other elements from the dust to the humus.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations42
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Exploration Environment AnalysisSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207