MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321237218 · doi:10.1061/40628(268)19

Flocculation and the Fate of Drill Mud Discharges

2002· article· en· W2321237218 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. Tedford, Charles G. Hannah, Timothy G. Milligan, John W. Loder, D. K. Muschenheim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsAcadia UniversityBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlingBenthic zoneGeologyFlocculationSeabedDrillingSedimentSedimentationShear stressSediment transportOceanographyTurbulenceContinental shelfDrill cuttingsGeomorphologyGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental scienceMechanicsDrilling fluidMeteorologyMaterials scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flocculation of the fine particulate portion of drilling mud during discharge into the ocean provides a pathway for an impact on the benthic environment in that the higher settling velocity of flocculated particles leads to higher concentrations near the sea floor. The benthic boundary layer transport model, bblt, has been developed for predicting the dispersion and transport of suspended sediment in the benthic boundary layer on the continental shelf. Past bblt applications aimed at impact zone assessment of drill mud discharges on the Atlantic Canadian shelf have used a constant settling velocity to describe particle settling. However, recent observations on the shelf suggest that natural flocs break up when the turbulent shear stress exceeds 0.1 Pa. We incorporate a variable settling velocity into the bblt model to investigate how stress-dependant flocculation affects the magnitude and frequency of high drill mud concentrations near the sea floor. Applications to the Hibernia drill site on the Grand Banks and the Cohasset site near Sable Island are considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207