Bibliographic record
Abstract
The equivalence of composite liners involving a geomembrane (GM) and a compacted clay liner (CCL) to alternative composite liners with a geomembrane, geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) and attenuation layer (AL) is assessed in terms of the contaminant impact occurring in a receptor aquifer. Calculations of contaminant impact of dichloromethane, benzene and chloride through GM/CCL/AL and GM/GCL/AL composite liners are reported for a hypothetical municipal solid waste landfill. The geomembrane in conjunction with either the CCL or GCL is very effective at controlling leakage such that diffusion essentially dominates the impact on the aquifer for the service life of the geomembrane. The geomembrane itself offers little resistance to diffusion of dichloromethane and benzene, and consequently the CCL or GCL and AL (of suitable thickness) are required to protect the aquifer. In contrast, the geomembrane acts as an excellent diffusion barrier to chloride over its service life. For the cases and parameters examined, the GM/GCL/AL liners were found to provide the same or even greater environmental protection to the underlying aquifer relative to GM/CCL/AL liners provided the total thickness of the liner system with the GCL was the same as that with the CCL. This can be achieved by having a thicker attenuation layer with the GM/GCL liners. Chloride impacted on the aquifer only after the service life of the geomembrane had been reached, after which contaminant transport was controlled by advection though the soil component of the liner for the cases examined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".