MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514155423 · doi:10.1061/9780784480144.031

A Permeable Reactive Barrier Installed in Acid Sulfate Soil Terrain

2016· article· en· W2514155423 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeo-Chicago 2016 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnvironmental remediation with nanomaterials
Canadian institutionsGeomechanica (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermeable reactive barrierEnvironmental remediationGroundwaterSulfateReactive materialEnvironmental scienceGroundwater remediationContaminated groundwaterEnvironmental engineeringTerrainEnvironmental chemistryMining engineeringContaminationChemistryGeologyGeotechnical engineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Permeable reactive barriers (PRBs) are used worldwide for the remediation of contaminated groundwater in the subsurface. This paper showcases a PRB installed in an acid sulfate soil rich ground to neutralize acidic groundwater. Recycled concrete has been used as the reactive material. Its performance is monitored over 8 years and has shown promising results for treatment in the long-term by maintaining a neutral pH and removing heavy metals from groundwater. Heavy metals (Al and Fe) precipitate out of solution and armor the reactive surfaces of recycled concrete, which leads to a decrease in the efficiency. Longevity of the PRB is predicted considering the rate of exhaustion of reactive material, rate of precipitation of secondary minerals and the groundwater flow at field site.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.002

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 head0.187
Teacher spread0.182 · 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