MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328085972 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609-pdb.191.p17

Lake-Based Magnetic Mapping Of Contaminated Sediments, Hamilton Harbour, Ontario, Canada

2002· article· en· W2328085972 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew R. Pozza, Joseph I. Boyce, William A. Morris

Bibliographic record

Venue15th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarbourSedimentEnvironmental remediationMagnetic anomalyGeologyMagnetometerPollutantEnvironmental magnetismMagnetic surveyEnvironmental scienceMineralogyHydrology (agriculture)OceanographyContaminationGeomorphologyMagnetic fieldChemistryGeophysicsEcologyPhysicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The remediation of toxic sediments in harbours and urban waterways requires detailed mapping of contaminated sediment distribution and thickness. Conventional methods rely on interpolation of pollutant concentrations from widely spaced core samples but can lead to significant errors in estimating sediment distribution. An improved approach, as demonstrated by recent work in Hamilton Harbour, in southern Ontario, is to estimate pollutant levels from ‘proxy’ measurements of sediment magnetic properties. Measurements from 40 core samples collected within the harbour show that the magnetic susceptibility of the contaminated upper layer of sediment is up to two orders of magnitude greater than in the underlying uncontaminated ‘pre-colonial’ sediments. The susceptibility contrast results from elevated levels of urbansourced magnetic oxides and is sufficient to generate a measurable total field anomaly (ca. 5-40 nT) that can be measured with a towed magnetometer. Lake-based magnetic surveying (> 500 line km) of the harbour using a towed Overhauser marine magnetometer clearly identifies a number of shallow magnetic anomalies which coincide with known contaminant ‘hot-spots’ and accumulations of urban sediments on the harbour bottom. Detection of shallow sediment magnetic response is dependent upon a closely spaced survey grid (< 75 m line spacing, 1 m inline sampling) and careful post-cruise processing to remove diurnal, regional and water-depth related variations in the magnetic field intensity.

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)0.000
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.147
Teacher spread0.141 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue15th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental ProblemsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207