MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135474850 · doi:10.1029/2007gl032374

Isotopic fractionation in non‐equilibrium diffusive environments

2008· article· en· W2135474850 on OpenAlexafffund
David Risk, Lisa Kellman

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesAcadia University
KeywordsFractionationDiffusionEquilibrium fractionationSoil waterSteady state (chemistry)Mass-independent fractionationTRACERIsotope fractionationGeologyEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceChemistryChemical physicsSoil scienceThermodynamicsPhysicsChromatographyNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the broad implications of diffusive transport induced fractionations on the interpretation of isotopic processes in the geophysical environment using the example of gaseous CO 2 transport in soils. We use a simple model to simulate isotopic transport of CO 2 from soil into a headspace chamber, followed by laboratory validation of predicted values. The combined effects of isotopic and concentration gradients results in an observed fractionation of different magnitude than the accepted theoretical diffusion fractionation, which falls continuously during the headspace equilibration period. We show that isotopic data from a non‐steady state diffusive environment can be misinterpreted when steady state diffusion models are applied. The simple processes illustrated here can be extended to any isotopic species, and any diffusive environment where some (or full) equilibration takes place between component species.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
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)0.0000.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207