MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474832209 · doi:10.3997/1873-0604.2017049

Specific polarizability of sand–clay mixtures with varying ethanol concentration

2017· article· en· W2474832209 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNear Surface Geophysics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIllitePolarizabilityConductivityAdsorptionMineralogyClay mineralsSaturation (graph theory)KaoliniteChemistryInduced polarizationHydraulic conductivityAnalytical Chemistry (journal)PorosityElectrical resistivity and conductivityGeologySoil scienceChromatographySoil waterOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We utilise a concept of specific polarizability , represented as the ratio of mineral‐fluid interface polarization per pore‐normalised surface area , to demonstrate the influence of clay‐organic interaction on complex conductivity measurements. Complex conductivity measurements were performed on kaolinite‐ and illite‐sand mixtures as a function of varying ethanol (EtOH) concentration (10% and 20% v/v). The specific surface area of each clay type and Ottawa sand was determined by nitrogen‐gas‐adsorption Brunauer‐Emmett‐Teller method. We also calculated the porosity and saturation of each mixture based on weight loss of dried samples. Debye decomposition, a phenom‐enological model, was applied to the complex conductivity data to determine normalised chargea‐bility . Specific polarizability estimates from previous complex conductivity measurements for bentonite‐sand mixtures were compared with our dataset. The for all sand–clay mixtures decreased as the EtOH concentration increased from 0% to 10% to 20% v/v. We observe similar responses to EtOH concentration for all sand–clay mixtures. Analysis of variance with a level of significance suggests that the suppression in responses with increasing EtOH concentration was statistically significant for all sand–clay mixtures. On the other hand, real conductivity showed only 10% to 20% v/v changes with increasing EtOH concentration. The estimates reflect the sensitivity of complex conductivity measurements to alteration in surface chemistry at available surface adsorption sites for different clay types, likely resulting from ion exchange at the clay surface and associated with kinetic reactions in the electrical double layer of the clay‐water‐EtOH media. Our results indicate a much larger influence of specific surface area and ethanol concentration on clay‐driven polarization relative to changes in clay mineralogy.

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.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.224 · 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