MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095226182 · doi:10.3997/1873-0604.2012057

Effect of hydrocarbon contamination on streaming potential

2012· article· en· W2095226182 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNear Surface Geophysics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreaming currentGroundwaterHydrogeologyHydraulic headSedimentCurrent (fluid)GeologyHydraulic conductivityHydrology (agriculture)MineralogySoil scienceEnvironmental chemistryChemistryGeotechnical engineeringSoil waterElectrokinetic phenomenaGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decade, spontaneous potentials have been used to map reduced groundwater contaminant plumes. The measured signal includes contributions of both the streaming potential and the geo‐chemical electrical potential and for these applications the geochemical electrical potential is of interest. Therefore, the streaming potential must be modelled and subtracted from the measured spontaneous potential. Streaming potential is caused by the displacement of ions in the electrical double layer on sediments due to hydraulic head gradients in the fluid within a porous medium. Commonly, the streaming current coupling coefficient is assumed to be constant when modelling the streaming potential both inside and outside a contaminant plume. We postulated that organic contaminants might change the sediment surface properties, thereby affecting the streaming potential signature. To test this hypothesis, we used sediment and groundwater samples from hydrocarbon impacted field sites. Samples were equilibrated with water from the site for several weeks before the tests. Each sample was split into two and tested with clean water and hydrocarbon polluted water in an apparatus constructed following the design of Sheffer ( ). The streaming current coupling coefficient of the polluted sub‐samples was lower than that of the unpolluted sub‐samples for five of the six samples tested. Other parameters measured were hydraulic conductivity, cation exchange capacity and for the fluid: electrical conductivity, pH, major ions and hydrocarbons. Based on the values of the laboratory experiments, numerical modelling was used to demonstrate that the impact of these changes on field measurements is negligible.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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