MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086687470 · doi:10.1021/es9005652

Modeling Soil Acidification in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region, Alberta, Canada

2009· article· en· W2086687470 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Colin J. Whitfield, Julian Aherne, Shaun A. Watmough

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAcademia Oamenilor de Știință din România
KeywordsOil sandsEnvironmental scienceUnconventional oilGeologyHydrology (agriculture)AsphaltGeotechnical engineeringArchaeologyGeographyOil shale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial activities have proliferated across Canada's Athabasca Oil Sands Region in recent years, stimulating concerns over the impact of atmospheric sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions on acid-sensitive terrain. Upland jack pine forests have been identified as possibly the most sensitive ecosystem in the region but despite high emissions of SO2, sulfur (S) deposition is relatively low across much of the region. The response of forest soils at 11 locations that exhibit low estimated weathering rates (< 10 mmol(c) x m(-2) x yr(-1)) was simulated for the period 1900-2100 using a dynamic hydrogeochemical model assuming no change or doubling of S deposition. The model predicted minimal impact on soil base saturation (BS), but a decline in soil solution base cation (BC) to aluminum (Al) ratio (BC:Al). The regional effects-based emissions management framework uses modeled changes in these two parameters relative to site-specific chemical thresholds to trigger actions to reduce S emissions. Modeled changes in BS are insufficient to invoke a response. Under base case conditions, modeled BC:Al reaches the chemical threshold at two and three sites within 15 and 30 years, respectively. Under conditions of double S deposition, seven sites are simulated to reach the threshold within 30 years. Nonetheless, the chemical thresholds are stringent relative to critical chemical criteria used elsewhere and the impacts of acidic deposition in the region are anticipated to be limited.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207