MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050601271 · doi:10.1080/15275922.2012.730114

Application of Light Petroleum Biomarkers for Forensic Characterization and Source Identification of Spilled Light Refined Oils

2012· article· en· W2050601271 on OpenAlexaff
Chun Yang, Z. D. Wang, Bruce P. Hollebone, Carl E. Brown, Mike Landriault, Ben Fieldhouse, Zeyu Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Forensics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)PetroleumCharacterization (materials science)Oil spillEnvironmental scienceLight crude oilPetroleum engineeringBiochemical engineeringLight sourceComputer scienceComputational biologyEnvironmental chemistryForensic engineeringEngineeringChemistryMaterials scienceNanotechnologyBiologyEcologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light petroleum biomarkers such as bicyclic sesquiterpanes and diamondoids are ubiquitous components of crude oils and ancient sediments, and are also widely found in intermediate petroleum distillates and many finished petroleum products. These compounds are relatively resistant to biodegradation and light-to-medium evaporation weathering, thus particularly useful in oil-source correlation and differentiation for those cases where the traditional tri- to pentacyclic biomarkers are absent. This work utilized sesquiterpanes and diamondoids for fingerprinting and identification of light oils spilled on water. The gas chromatography/flame ionization detection (GC/FID) analysis and distribution profiles of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAHs) and conventional biomarkers suggest that the spilled oils are mixtures of mainly gasoline and light diesel type fuel. Since potential source oil candidates were not available, and a large part of the hydrocarbons in gasoline and diesel co-eluted in chromatographic analysis, it is a challenge to quantify the gasoline and diesel in spill samples. It has been known from previous studies that the bulk concentrations of C14 to C16 sesquiterpanes are in the range of approximately 6,000 to 9,000 μg/g for many light diesel fuels, while little or no sesquiterpanes were detected in gasoline, light kerosene and heavy-end lubricating oils. The target sesquiterpanes in the spilled oil samples were determined to be in quite high concentrations: approximately 4,000 μg/g oil. Therefore, it was estimated that these spilled oil samples consist of approximately half gasoline and half light diesel. To verify the estimation, spilled samples were simulated by mixing a fresh gasoline and a light diesel with a similar carbon range as the spilled oils. Results from comparison of GC/FID chromatograms of the spilled oils with the simulated spill samples are consistent with that obtained from sesquiterpane analysis.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ForensicsSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207