MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745838298 · doi:10.1071/aj15052

Evaluating potential coal seam gas impacts to the Condamine Alluvium: an example of successful community involvement

2016· article· en· W2745838298 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

VenueThe APPEA Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Properties and Utilization
Canadian institutionsKlohn Crippen Berger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlluviumAquiferGeologyGroundwaterAlluvial plainDrillingCoal miningHydrogeologyCoalMining engineeringHydrology (agriculture)Geotechnical engineeringArchaeologyEngineeringGeomorphologyGeographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The groundwater resources of the Condamine River Alluvial Aquifer (Condamine Alluvium) in Queensland have been developed in the past 60 years for irrigation, stock, domestic and other uses. Extraction of more than 55,000 mL/yr from this aquifer is critical to supporting the local irrigation industry. Existing and proposed coal seam gas development in the Surat Basin extends to underneath the western edge of the CA footprint and involves depressurisation of coals that form up to 10% of the Walloon Coal Measures (WCM) at some depth below the alluvium. Reduced groundwater availability from the already-stressed Condamine Alluvium is thus an oft-quoted concern of landholders when further development of the CSG industry is considered. An extensive study, led by the Queensland Office of Groundwater Impact Assessment (OGIA) and supported by Arrow Energy, was carried out to provide quantitative assessments of vertical hydraulic conductivity between the alluvium, coal measures and intervening formations. This extended abstract focuses on one element of the aforementioned study led by Arrow Energy, specifically, aquifer testing undertaken at two representative sites overlying the Condamine Alluvium. This included drilling and collection of core; geophysical, geomechanical and geochemical testing; test pumping and monitoring; and, modelling. An important element of this project, aside from sharing of data and results—was the involvement of local landholders in development of the investigations, and attendance at field days during drilling and presentation of results. Key findings included estimated ranges of vertical hydraulic conductivity derived from parameter estimation modelling that were lower than previously suggested.

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)0.002
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 score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.206 · 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