MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081502755 · doi:10.1021/es902940m

Response to Comment on “Effect of Groundwater Iron and Phosphate on the Efficacy of Arsenic Removal by Iron-Amended BioSand Filters”

2009· article· en· W2081502755 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamín C. Bostick, Hannah Chiew, M. Sampson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicArsenic contamination and mitigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationAltmetricsSocial mediaObservatoryLibrary scienceComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVCorrespondence/Rebut...Correspondence/RebuttalNEXTResponse to Comment on "Effect of Groundwater Iron and Phosphate on the Efficacy of Arsenic Removal by Iron-Amended BioSand Filters"Benjamin C. Bostick, Hannah Chiew, and M. L. SampsonView Author Information Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, Palisades New York 10964 Department of Civil Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada RDI-C (Resource Development International-Cambodia), Royal Brick Road, Kean Svay, Kandal, Cambodia RDI-C (Resource Development International-Cambodia), Royal Brick Road, Kean Svay, Kandal, CambodiaCite this: Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, 22, 8696–8697Publication Date (Web):October 15, 2009Publication History Published online15 October 2009Published inissue 15 November 2009https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es902940mhttps://doi.org/10.1021/es902940marticle-commentaryACS PublicationsCopyright © 2009 American Chemical Society. This publication is available under these Terms of Use. Request reuse permissions This publication is free to access through this site. Learn MoreArticle Views783Altmetric-Citations3LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail PDF (47 KB) Get e-AlertscloseSUBJECTS:Arsenic,Groundwaters,Iron,Oxidation,Phosphates Get e-Alerts

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0120.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2740.132

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicArsenic contamination and mitigationFrench-language works237,207