MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk Management of BTEX Contamination in Ground Water—An Integrated Fuzzy Approach

2008· article· en· W2126272514 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xiaosheng Qin, Guohe Huang, Yongping Li

Bibliographic record

VenueGround Water · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBTEXRisk assessmentFuzzy logicRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceRisk managementContaminationEnvironmental scienceReliability engineeringEngineeringBusinessArtificial intelligenceXylene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An integrated fuzzy simulation-assessment method (FSAM) was developed for assessing environmental risks from petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in ground water. In the FSAM, techniques of fuzzy simulation and fuzzy risk assessment were coupled into a general framework to reflect a variety of system uncertainties. A petroleum-contaminated site located in western Canada was selected as a study case for demonstrating applicability of the proposed method. The risk assessment results demonstrated that system uncertainties would significantly impact expressions of risk-level outputs. A relatively deterministic expression of the risks would have clearer representations of the study problem but may miss valuable uncertain information; conversely, an assessment under vaguer system conditions would help reveal potential consequences of adverse effects but would suffer from a higher degree of fuzziness in presenting the modeling outputs. Based on the risk assessment results, a decision analysis procedure was used to calculate a general risk index (GRI) to help identify proper responsive actions. The proposed method was useful for evaluating risks within a system containing multiple factors with complicated uncertainties and interactions and providing support for identifying proper site management strategies.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGround WaterSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207