MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314212583 · doi:10.1021/es300299r

Modeling Gas Formation and Mineral Precipitation in a Granular Iron Column

2012· article· en· W2314212583 on OpenAlexafffund
Sung‐Wook Jeen, Richard T. Amos, David W. Blowes

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryPrecipitationReactivity (psychology)Permeability (electromagnetism)Chemical engineeringEnvironmental chemistryMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In granular iron permeable reactive barriers (PRBs), hydrogen gas formation, entrapment and release of gas bubbles, and secondary mineral precipitation have been known to affect the permeability and reactivity. The multicomponent reactive transport model MIN3P was enhanced to couple gas formation and release, secondary mineral precipitation, and the effects of these processes on hydraulic properties and iron reactivity. The enhanced model was applied to a granular iron column, which was studied for the treatment of trichloroethene (TCE) in the presence of dissolved CaCO(3). The simulation reasonably reproduced trends in gas formation, secondary mineral precipitation, permeability changes, and reactivity changes observed over time. The simulation showed that the accumulation of secondary minerals reduced the reactivity of the granular iron over time, which in turn decreased the rate of mineral accumulation, and also resulted in a gradual decrease in gas formation over time. This study provides a quantitative assessment of the evolving nature of geochemistry and permeability, resulting from coupled processes of gas formation and mineral precipitation, which leads to a better understanding of the processes controlling the granular iron reactivity, and represents an improved method for incorporating these factors into the design of granular iron PRBs.

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 score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations35
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterialsFrench-language works237,207