MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087282975 · doi:10.1080/15275920600667153

Use of Logarithmic-Scale Correlation Plots to Represent Contaminant Ratios for Evaluation of Subsurface Environmental Data

2006· article· en· W2087282975 on OpenAlexaff
Stanley Feenstra

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Forensics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsProfound Medical (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwaterContaminationEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceSedimentDilutionEnvironmental chemistryDispersion (optics)Soil contaminationSorptionHydrology (agriculture)Soil waterChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contaminant concentration ratios are used commonly to distinguish between different sources of contamination and to evaluate contaminant attenuation in groundwater, soil air, soil, and sediment. Logarithmic-scale correlation (log-log) plots provide special capabilities in representing contaminant ratios. Log-log plots can reflect the ranges in concentrations over many orders of magnitude, the magnitude and ranges of concentration ratios, and whether ratios are constant or change with declining concentration. Declines in contaminant concentrations due to dilution and dispersion processes will not change contaminant ratios, and such data should plot along isoratio lines. If contaminant concentrations are reduced also by other attenuation processes such as sorption or biodegradation that affect one of the contaminants to a greater degree than the other, the ratio will change and the data will deviate from the isoratio line trends. Examples are given to illustrate the use of log-log plots in the interpretation of chemical data from sites of groundwater, soil air, and sediment contamination.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.259
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 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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ForensicsSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207