MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143049114 · doi:10.1002/hyp.5650

Pressure variations in peat as a result of gas bubble dynamics

2004· article· en· W2143049114 on OpenAlexafffund
Erik Kellner, Jonathan S. Price, J. M. Waddington

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPiezometerPeatHydraulic conductivityCloggingPressure gradientGeologyPore water pressureMethaneEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceSwellHydrology (agriculture)AquiferSoil waterGroundwaterGeotechnical engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transient high pore‐water pressures, up to 50 cm higher than ambient pressure, developed over the summer season at various depths in a shallow (1 m) fen peat. The excess pressures had a pattern of gradual increases and sharp drops, and their initiation and release typically corresponded to abrupt changes in atmospheric pressure. We conclude that these phenomena depend on gas bubbles (probably methane) generated by biological activity, both by clogging pores and by building up pressure as they grow. These transient and spatially discontinuous high‐pressure zones were found using pressure transducers in sealed (backfilled) pits, but not in piezometers open to the atmosphere. Piezometers may provide a conduit for the release of gas and pressure, thus rendering them unsuitable for measuring this phenomenon. Although the development of localized zones of high pressure causes erratic and unpredictable hydraulic gradients, we suggest that their effect on the flow of water or solutes is offset by the reduced permeability caused by the bubbles, which allows them to be sustained. These zones, however, probably deflect flows driven by the dominant hydraulic gradients. Furthermore, they may cause the peat volume to adjust (swell). The use and interpretation of traditional methods for estimating hydraulic head and conductivity in peat soils thus require great caution. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations65
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207