High Resolution Pore Water δ<sup>2</sup>H and δ<sup>18</sup>O Measurements by H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>(liquid)</sub>−H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>(vapor)</sub> Equilibration Laser Spectroscopy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new H2O(liquid)-H2O(vapor) pore water equilibration and laser spectroscopy method provides a fast way to obtain accurate high resolution deltaD and delta18O profiles from single core samples from saturated and unsaturated geologic media. The precision and accuracy of the H2O(liquid)-H2O(vapor) equilibration method was comparable to or better than conventional IRMS-based methods, and it can be conducted on geologic cores that contain volumetric water contents as low as 5%. Significant advantages of the H2O(liquid)-H2O(vapor) pore water equilibration method and laser isotopic analysis method include dual hydrogen- and oxygen-isotope assays on single small core samples, low consumable and instrumentation costs, and the potential for field-based hydrogeologic profiling. A single core is sufficient to obtain detailed vertical isotopic depth profiles in geologic, soil, and lacustrine pore water, dramatically reducing the cost of obtaining pore water by conventional wells or physical water extraction methods. In addition, other inherent problems like contamination of wells by leakage and drilling fluids can be eliminated.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it