MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332455251 · doi:10.1080/15275922.2013.814180

Evaluation of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Measurement Methods for Assessing Oil Contamination in Soil

2013· article· en· W2332455251 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zeyu Yang, Zhendi Wang, Chun Yang, Bruce P. Hollebone, Carl E. Brown, Mike Landriault

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Forensics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Ethnic Affairs Commission of the People's Republic of ChinaFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsTotal petroleum hydrocarbonContaminationChemistrySoil testFlame ionization detectorHydrocarbonGas chromatographySoil contaminationSilica gelEnvironmental chemistryChromatographyPetroleumFraction (chemistry)Soil waterEnvironmental scienceSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most commonly used total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) analysis method measures petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in soil by carbon range that can be detected by gas chromatography/flame ionization detection (GC/FID). Different cleanup procedures have been performed for removing some naturally occurring organics from petrogenic hydrocarbons prior to GC/FID analysis. To evaluate the different pre-treatment methods, more than 60 samples (including background soil and plant samples, as well as oil contaminated soil samples) were sampled from 2008 to 2010 in Canada. TPH values without cleanup (TPH-T), with column cleanup (TPH-F 3) and with in-situ cleanup (TPH-F) were compared to evaluate the effects of different pre-treatment methods on the TPH analysis values. Different total solvent extractable materials (TSEM) loading amounts were applied for in-situ silica gel cleanup method to evaluate the effect of the TSEM loading amount on the measured TPH-F values. The column cleanup method was evaluated by comparing the representative polar biogenic organic compounds (BOCs) and TPH in polar fraction (designated as TPH-F 4). Qualitatively, cleanup procedures removed most of the BOCs for background samples with high content of BOCs, but the GC/FID chromatograms did not show significant alteration for samples with heavy oil contamination. The quantified TPH-T, TPH-F 3 and TPH-F showed good agreement for oil contaminated samples, even though the loading dosage exceeded the maximum TSEM limits of silica gel (16.7 mg TSEM on per gram silica gel). For background samples, the measured TPH values were ranked as: TPH-T > TPH-F > TPH-F 3 when the TSEM loading amount exceeded 16.7 mg/g of silica gel, but no obvious difference was observed when the TSEM loading amount was less than 16.7 mg/g. Therefore, the TSEM loading capacity played an important role for the cleanup of background samples. The comparison of the measured TPH-T and TPH-F 3 obtained from background soil and plant samples did not show an obvious relationship, thus TPH values of soil samples can not be replaced by those from plants grown in the soil sampled area. The evaluation of column cleanup method showed that this method can effectively remove most of the BOCs, but the removal of the hydrocarbons which contribute to the measured TPH-F 3 can be negligible.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ForensicsSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207