MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324851216 · doi:10.2166/wst.2012.179

Evaluation of the origin of nitrate influencing the Ključ groundwater source, Serbia

2012· article· en· W2324851216 on OpenAlexaff
Nada Miljević, Djulija Boreli-Zdravković, Vesna Obradović, Dušan Golobočanin, Bernhard Mayer

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGroundwater and Isotope Geochemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsNitrateGroundwaterEnvironmental chemistryNitrificationDenitrificationAquiferEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Stable isotope ratioSewageNitrogenChemistryEnvironmental engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the use of the dual isotope method involving δ(15)N and δ(18)O measurements of dissolved nitrates to assess the origin and fate of groundwater nitrate at the Ključ groundwater source, Serbia. A sampling campaign was conducted in September 2007 during flow conditions obtaining groundwater from observation wells and river water fed by a shallow aquifer hosted in alluvial (sandy-gravel) sediments. Nitrate isotope ratios ranged from +5.3 to +16.9‰ and δ(18)O(NO(3)) values varied from -2.3 to +5.0‰. Two major contamination sources were identified with isotopic compositions characteristic for nitrate derived from nitrification of soil organic nitrogen (+5.3 to +7.8‰ for δ(15)N) resulting in nitrate concentrations of 33.6 and 78.8 mg/L and nitrate derived from animal wastes or human sewage, e.g. via septic systems, yielding δ(15)N values of +9.9 to +11.9‰ and elevated nitrate concentrations of 31.2-245.8 mg/L. The occurrence of nitrification and denitrification was also revealed based on concentration and isotope data for dissolved nitrate.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicGroundwater and Isotope GeochemistryFrench-language works237,207