MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329809230 · doi:10.1061/40972(311)118

Assessment of Soil Vulnerability to Heavy-Metal Contamination Using Hierarchical Fuzzy Inference System

2008· article· en· W2329809230 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Amid, Maria Elektorowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoCongress 2008 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMulti-Criteria Decision Making
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrownfieldEnvironmental remediationEnvironmental scienceVulnerability (computing)Fuzzy inference systemContaminationFuzzy logicTopsoilWork (physics)Identification (biology)Computer scienceEnvironmental planningRisk analysis (engineering)Civil engineeringEngineeringAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemBusinessFuzzy control systemComputer securitySoil waterEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The existence of contaminated areas and their impact on health and environment has led to the restraint of usage of these sites (brownfield) and a change in the politics of revitalization of these sectors of the urban area. The efficiency of these politics and investments for remediation of contaminated sites in the living environment relies on powerful and transparent environmental management and environmental impact assessment (EIA). In order to identify and prioritize the contaminated sites for remediation, EIA and exposure analyses, a fast user-friendly and applicable tool is essential. In this work, hierarchical fuzzy inference system (HFIS) was applied and a tool was developed to introduce the critical environmental and geo-environmental factors for decision-making purposes. This technique uses the most pertinent factors and parameters involved in heavy-metal contamination of topsoil to develop a powerful tool. This tool permits making environmental decisions regarding identification of the topsoil vulnerability to heavy metals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoCongress 2008Same topicMulti-Criteria Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207