Characterisation of oil contaminated soils by comprehensive multiphase NMR spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental context Novel technology is used to examine oil contaminated soil to better understand this longstanding problem. The data indicate that oil forms a non-discriminant layer over all the soil components, which in their natural state would be exposed to water, and that it retains certain polar compounds while contributing other oil contaminants to the surrounding porewater and groundwater. Such molecular level information helps to better understand the reoccurrence of hydrophobicity in remediated soil, and could lead to novel clean-up methods. Abstract Comprehensive multiphase (CMP) NMR spectroscopy is a novel NMR technology introduced in 2012. CMP NMR spectroscopy permits the analysis of solid, gel and liquid phases in unaltered natural samples. Here the technology is applied to control and oil contaminated soils to understand the molecular processes that give rise to non-wettable soils. 13C solid-state NMR spectroscopy is found to be excellent for studying the bulk rigid components of the soils whereas 1H solution and gel-state NMR provide a complimentary overview to subtleties occurring at the soil–water interface. Considered holistically the NMR data support the finding that the oil forms a non-discriminant layer over all the soil components, which in the natural state, would be exposed to water. Specifically, the oil was found to preferentially coat aliphatics and carbohydrates that normally stick out at the soil–water interface. In addition, it was shown that the oil forms a barrier that keeps small polar molecules such as formic acid inside the soil. At the soil–water interface selective oil components, such as asphaltenes, were found to exhibit unrestricted diffusion, suggesting that these components could leach into surrounding groundwater.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".