MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508222807 · doi:10.5670/oceanog.2016.62

Chemical Composition of Macondo and Other Crude Oils and Compositional Alterations During Oil Spills

2016· article· en· W2508222807 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueOceanography · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of CalgaryGulf of Mexico Research Initiative
KeywordsCrude oilEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryOil spillComposition (language)Chemical compositionLight crude oilChemistryPetroleum engineeringEnvironmental engineeringGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crude oils are some of the most complex and diverse organic mixtures found in nature. They contain thousands of different compounds belonging to several compound classes, with the main ones being hydrocarbons and their heteroatom (N, S, and O)-containing analogs, called non-hydrocarbons. In general, all crude oils contain the same types of chemical structures, but these compounds can be in highly variable proportions in crude oils drawn from different reservoir conditions and locations. Both the types of compounds and their respective quantities change rapidly once the crude oil is spilled into the environment, making the circumstances associated with every spill unique. In general, smaller and lower molecular weight oil compounds are more susceptible to processes such as evaporation, dissolution, and biodegradation, while the heavier, more hydrophobic compounds tend to adhere to living organisms or particulates and persist. The presence of certain compounds, such as PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), also determines the acute and chronic toxicity of the spilled oil. Natural processes can degrade virtually all compounds in crude oils, with aerobic oxidation proceeding much faster than anaerobic degradation, although not all crude oil components are degraded with the same speed. The environmental fate and effects of crude oil degraded by biodegradation and photooxidation are yet to be fully determined. Due to the submarine and offshore setting of the Macondo well blowout, components of the spilled oil were distributed throughout the marine environment—water column, sediments, surface waters, and the coast. The light and nonviscous nature of Macondo crude oil favored its removal through natural degradation, evaporation, dissolution, and dispersal processes. In spite of the unprecedented quantities of oil that spilled, the final fate and effects of the oil, the more recalcitrant fractions of Macondo oil, and the oil weathering products have not been totally elucidated. Responders with knowledge of the physical properties of the Macondo oil executed their preplanned response efforts and kept a majority of the oil from reaching the more sensitive coastal areas.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.193 · 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