MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W234597215 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2009.016

Physicochemical Distribution of Metals in the Water Phase of Catch Basin Mixtures

2009· article· en· W234597215 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristin Karlsson, Magnus Westerstrand, Maria Viklander, Johan Ingri

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVetenskapsrådetLuleå KommunSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsEnvironmental chemistryStructural basinTotal organic carbonSedimentParticulatesTrace elementChemistryEnvironmental scienceFraction (chemistry)MineralogyGeologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A mixture of sediment and water is formed during the cleansing of catch basins. This paper discusses the concentration levels and distribution of numerous metals and organic carbon (OC) in the water phase of this mixture. The results show that due to the high concentrations of metals in the water phase, the catch basin mixture should be treated before it reaches a recipient. Three sites with different types of area and traffic intensity were sampled. Four fractions were analyzed: unfiltered, dissolved (<0.2 µm), colloidal (0.22 µm to 1 kD [kilodalton]), and truly dissolved (<1 kD). The results of the unfiltered fraction show high concentrations of metals and OC in the catch basin mixture. A comparison of Canadian and Swedish Environmental Protection Agency guidelines and the catch basin mixtures shows that concentrations exceeded the threshold values for As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn. Compared with samples from a reference lake in the area, the unfiltered fraction showed high concentrations of all elements. OC seems to have a large impact on the overall speciation of trace metals in the catch basin mixture. To trace the sources of the particulate fraction in the unfiltered samples, Al-normalization was used. Al-normalization indicated that Ca, K, Mg, Na, Mn, Ba, Co, and Cr concentrations could be explained by mineral particles used as traction control. Furthermore, the trace elements As, Cu, Pb, Zn, and Ni were all enriched in the catch basin mixture.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207