MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2392748763

A new testing method of biotoxicity and toxicity grading standard for oiifield chemicals and drilling fluids

2004· article· en· W2392748763 on OpenAlexaff
Jun-xin Fan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrilling fluidLuminescent bacteriaGrading (engineering)DrillingPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental scienceToxicityChemistryMaterials scienceGeologyMetallurgyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using luminescent bacteria as the testing medium, a new biotoxicity testing method for oilfield chemicals and drilling fluids was worked out. The principle is, based on characteristics of luminescent that the luminosity decreases lineally with the bulk toxicity concentration of the sample, measure the luminosity in 15 min after the luminescent bacteria touching the sample, then decide the toxicity level. This testing method and toxicity grading is simple and convenient. According to actual condition of onshore oilfield,grading standard for oilfield chemicals and drilling fluid is presented. Some oilfield chemicals and drilling fluids were tested based on the standard to verify the feasibility of the new study.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207