MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2284870749 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b01656

Estimates of Octanol–Water Partitioning for Thousands of Dissolved Organic Species in Oil Sands Process-Affected Water

2015· article· en· W2284870749 on OpenAlexafffund
Kun Zhang, Alberto dos Santos Pereira, Jonathan W. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHelmholtz-GemeinschaftUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsOil sandsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryDissolved organic carbonProcess (computing)ChemistryAsphaltMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the octanol-water distribution ratios (DOW, that is, apparent KOW at pH 8.4) of 2114 organic species in oil sands process-affected water were estimated by partitioning to polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) coated stir bars and analysis by ultrahigh resolution orbitrap mass spectrometry in electrospray positive ((+)) and negative ((-)) ionization modes. At equilibrium, the majority of species in OSPW showed negligible partitioning to PDMS (i.e., DOW <1), however estimated DOW's for some species ranged up to 100,000. Most organic acids detected in ESI- had negligible partitioning, although some naphthenic acids (O2(-) species) had estimated DOW ranging up to 100. Polar neutral and basic compounds detected in ESI+ generally partitioned to PDMS to a greater extent than organic acids. Among these species, DOW was greatest among 3 groups: up to 1000 for mono-oxygenated species (O(+) species), up to 127,000 for NO(+) species, and up to 203,000 for SO(+) species. A positive relationship was observed between DOW and carbon number, and a negative relationship was observed with the number of double bonds (or rings). The results highlight that nonacidic compounds in OSPW are generally more hydrophobic than naphthenic acids and that some may be highly bioaccumulative and contribute to toxicity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207