MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062738884 · doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2005-1-1081

SOURCE IDENTIFICATION OF AN UNKNOWN SPILL (2002) FROM QUEBEC BY THE MULTI-CRITERION ANALYTICAL APPROACH AND LAB SIMULATION OF THE SPILL SAMPLE

2005· article· en· W2062738884 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zhendi Wang, Bruce P. Hollebone, Chun Yang, Merv Fingas, Mike Landriault

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil spillSample (material)Environmental scienceDiesel fuelSample preparationChromatographyChemistryEngineeringWaste managementEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper describes a case study of an oil spill into Canal Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec in 2002. In response to this specific oil identification need, a lab spill simulation was designed to obtain simulated spill samples from the suspected source samples. The integrated multi-criterion approach using GC/MS and GC/FID was then applied for fingerprinting and identifying the spill oil samples. The distribution patterns of hydrocarbons in the spill and suspected source samples were recognized and compared. Analysis of oil-characteristic biomarkers and the extended suite of parent and alkylated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) were performed. A variety of diagnostic ratios of “source-specific marker” compounds for interpreting chemical fingerprinting data were determined and analyzed. Finally, the major components in suspected source samples were identified. The detailed chemical characterization data highlight that: (1) the spilled oil 264 is diesel fuel, while the suspected source sample 265 is an emulsified Bunker C type fuel; (2) another suspected source sample 266 is a de greaser-type “pine oil” product; (3) the synthetic spill sample from 265 and 266 has a completely different GC profile and chemical composition from the spill sample 264. No component of sample 266 was found and recognized in sample 264.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207