MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Radionuclide sorption to a mixture of anaerobic bacteria in the repository environment

2002· article· en· W2093322121 on OpenAlexaff
Takayuki Sasaki, Takumi Kubota, Saeko Mito, Tiit Kauri, Akira Kudō

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Science and Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSorptionBacteriaChemistryAnaerobic bacteriaRadionuclideAdsorptionAnaerobic exerciseNuclear chemistryRadiochemistryPartition coefficientAqueous solutionChromatographyOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sorption of the radionuclides, Pu, Np, Pa, Sr and Cs, to a mixture of anaerobic bacteria activated under specific conditions of temperature, pH and depleted nutrients after a long dormant period has been investigated. For Pu, after 4 hours at neutral pH, the distribution coefficient (Kd) between bacteria and aqueous phase at 308 and 278 K was around 103'4 (ml g"1). Over 5 days, however, the Kd at 308 K increased to over 105. Sterilized (dead) and dormant anaerobic bacteria adsorbed Pu to the same extent. Kd for Np at 308 K after 5 days had a low value around 102. After 10 days, however, Kd was > 100-fold higher. On the other hand, Kd for Np at 278 K remained low, without any significant increase over time. The interaction between Pa and bacteria was found to be stronger than that for Np, with Kd for Pa about 100 times higher. For Sr and Ca, significant Kd change was not seen through 120 d. The value for Sr is a few times larger than that for Cs due to the different electrostatic interaction with the bacteria based on the charge of ion.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear Science and TechnologySame topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207