MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559661554 · doi:10.1111/1556-4029.13319

A City‐wide Investigation of the Isotopic Distribution and Source of Tap Waters for Forensic Human Geolocation Ground‐truthing

2016· article· en· W2559661554 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Momoko Ueda, Lynne Bell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsBurnaby HospitalSimon Fraser University
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsGeolocationTap waterEnvironmental scienceRange (aeronautics)Ground truthRemote sensingPhysical geographyGeographyComputer scienceEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Human geolocation is prefaced on the accuracy of the geographic precision of mapped isotopic values for drinking water. As most people live in cities, it becomes important to understand city water supplies and how the isotopic values uniquely reflect that city. This study investigated the isotopic distribution of δ2H and δ18O from sourced tap waters that were collected from across the Metro Vancouver (MV) area (n = 135). The results revealed that the isotopic values reflect their water sources with a range of 5.3‰ for δ18Otap and 29.3‰ for δ2Htap for MV. The results indicate that individual cities need higher resolution studies to determine their tap water isotopic ranges, and a good understanding of the water supply network itself for human geolocation work. With an extended high‐resolution understanding of each city, human tissue may be compared with more certainty for geolocation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.242
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

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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic SciencesSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207