Accuracy of Lysimeters for Dissolved Copper, Antimony, Lead, and Zinc Sampling under Small Arms Backstop
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three assays were conducted to evaluate the reliability of lysimeters in detecting concentrations of Cu, Pb, Sb, and Zn in interstitial water of the vadose zone. Two box lysimeters (BLs) made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and three tension lysimeters (TLs) of different types were used. Assays were conducted with two concentrations of dissolved metals, undiluted and diluted in a 1:10 ratio, and at three different pHs. The assays were made to evaluate the sorption induced by the lysimeter material itself, by standard quartz sand added to the BLs, and by two types of glass beads placed around the porous cup of the TLs. Generally, BLs were more suitable for interstitial water sampling than TLs. Among the TLs, the one made of nylon was more reliable than the two others. Box lysimeters are a good choice to obtain accurate and comparable results for Cu, Pb, Sb, and Zn analysis. However, they have to be backfilled with natural soil found at the exact location of the lysimeter and not with standard quartz sand. Nylon TLs can also be used for water sampling for Sb, Pb, and Zn analysis but not for Cu. Glass beads may interact with dissolved metals and their use around the suction cup in TLs can be avoided by using the fine fraction of natural sediments (<125 μm) found at the location of the porous cup. Water samples from TLs do not need to be filtered for dissolved metal analysis because they are already filtered by the porous cup.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".