Geovisualization of Mercury Contamination in Lake St. Clair Sediments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Laurentian Great Lakes of North America contain approximately 20% of the earth’s fresh water. Smaller lakes, rivers and channels connect the lakes to the St. Lawrence Seaway, creating an interconnected freshwater and marine ecosystem. The largest delta system in the Great Lakes is located in the northeastern portion of Lake St. Clair. This article focuses on the geovisualization of total mercury pollution from sediment samples that were collected in 1970, 1974 and 2001. To assess contamination patterns, dot maps were created and compared with surfaces that were generated using the kriging spatial interpolation technique. Bathymetry data were utilized in geovisualization procedures to develop three-dimensional representations of the contaminant surfaces. Lake St. Clair generally has higher levels of contamination in deeper parts of the lake, in the dredged shipping route through the lake and in proximity to the main outflow channels through the St. Clair delta. Mercury pollution levels were well above the Probable Effect Level in large portions of the lake in both 1970 and 1974. Lower contaminant concentrations were observed in the 2001 data. Lake-wide spatial distributions are discernable using the kriging technique; however, they are much more apparent when they are geovisualized using bathymetry data.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".