MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126578914 · doi:10.1139/t01-033

Osmotic flow through a Cretaceous clay in southern Saskatchewan, Canada

2001· article· en· W2126578914 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Bradley D. Cey, S. Lee Barbour, M. Jim Hendry

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geotechnical Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic conductivityGeotechnical engineeringGeologyPore water pressureSoil scienceChemistrySoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clays and shales can act as semipermeable membranes, causing osmotic flow and (or) osmotically induced fluid pressures. Despite laboratory proof of the osmotic behaviour of clay-rich geologic material, the influence of this osmotic behaviour on in situ groundwater flow and solute transport is inconclusive. This is due in part to the lack of laboratory experimental work involving undisturbed core samples, and to the lack of field-scale research. The ability of undisturbed clay samples to conduct flow hydraulically and osmotically was investigated using dilute salt solutions. Undisturbed Cretaceous clay samples from southern Saskatchewan were used in a laboratory experimental program. The experiments included constant-head hydraulic conductivity (K h ) tests and osmotic flow tests conducted over a range of pore-fluid concentrations of 0.054–1.12 equiv./L. The clay samples exhibited semipermeable membrane behaviour by conducting flow osmotically. The hydraulic conductivity of the clay increased by a factor of two as the pore-fluid concentration increased from 0.070 to 0.56 equiv./L. Osmotic efficiencies ranged from 0.0028 to 0.42 for concentrations from 0.84 to 0.096 equiv./L. Both the osmotic compressibility and osmotic efficiency decreased with increasing pore-fluid concentration. The behaviour of the clay was consistent with diffuse double-layer theory.Key words: osmotic flow, Cretaceous clay, salt, hydraulic conductivity.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations49
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geotechnical JournalSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207