MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090167170 · doi:10.1080/19338244.2010.516780

Spatial Mapping of Lead, Arsenic, Iron, and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Soil Contamination in Sydney, Nova Scotia: Community Impact From the Coke Ovens and Steel Plant

2011· article· en· W2090167170 on OpenAlexaffabout
Timothy W. Lambert, Jennifer Boehmer, Jason Feltham, Lindsay Guyn, Rizwan Shahid

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Environmental & Occupational Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental Justice and Health Disparities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceNova scotiaContaminationSoil waterArsenicSoil contaminationPolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbonEnvironmental chemistryGeographySoil scienceMetallurgyArchaeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents spatial maps of the arsenic, lead, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) soil contamination in Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada. The spatial maps were designed to create exposure cohorts to help understand the observed increase in health effects. To assess whether contamination can be a proxy for exposures, the following hypothesis was tested: residential soils were impacted by the coke oven and steel plant industrial complex. The spatial map showed contaminants are centered on the industrial facility, significantly correlated, and exceed Canadian health risk-based soil quality guidelines. Core samples taken at 5-cm intervals suggest a consistent deposition over time. The concentrations in Sydney significantly exceed background Sydney soil concentrations, and are significantly elevated compared with North Sydney, an adjacent industrial community. The contaminant spatial maps will also be useful for developing cohorts of exposure and guiding risk management decisions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Environmental & Occupational HealthSame topicEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesFrench-language works237,207