MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074093588 · doi:10.1109/icbbe.2010.5517455

Application of Hog Fuel for the Bioremediation of Oil Contaminated Soils

2010· article· en· W2074093588 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xinyuan Song, Jianbing Li

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial bioremediation and biosurfactants
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental remediationDispose patternBioremediationPetroleumEnvironmental scienceSoil waterWaste managementSoil contaminationPetroleum productContaminationFuel oilPulp and paper industryEnvironmental engineeringChemistryEngineeringSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hog fuel is a waste product from the forestry industry where many paper and pulp mills simply dispose of it by burning. In this study, the effect of applying this forestry waste for the remediation of oil contaminated soil was investigated. A field landfarming of soils contaminated by petroleum hydrocarbons at an oil and gas facility in western Canada was implemented with the addition of hog fuels. The experiments were conducted for 5 months while the average temperature was 11.4°C. The results show that landfarming decreased the TPH concentrations in all the four experimental plots. Up to 81% of the petroleum hydrocarbons in the soils were removed in the three experimental plots with addition of hog fuel, as compared to 43% efficiency with no addition of bulking agent in one plot. Thus hog fuel showed significant positive influence on landfarming efficiency in this study.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical EngineeringSame topicMicrobial bioremediation and biosurfactantsFrench-language works237,207