A Conceptual Model of Fate and Transport Processes for RDX Deposited to Surface Soils of North American Active Demolition Sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of hexahydro‐1,3,5‐trinitro‐1,3,5‐triazine (RDX) as an energetic material (EM) in ammunition constituents such as detonators, primers, mines, and rocket boosters and in plastic explosives has led to an international warning on possible soil, surface water, and groundwater contamination on military training sites. In Canada, the demolition sites of range training areas are known to be the second most contaminated sites by EM residues in terms of their concentrations in soil after anti‐tank ranges. This research proposes a conceptual model of the presence of RDX at the field scale at demolition sites according to previous soil and water characterization studies. This model illustrates the origin of RDX contamination, the main RDX transport pathways and processes, and the main threatened receptors. This conceptual model is of importance to visualize and understand RDX's environmental fate and behavior and to ultimately enable the production of a detailed quantitative model that can help to manage those RDX‐contaminated sites. Core Ideas RDX is mostly found in the form of aggregates of various sizes and shapes. A field‐scale conceptual model of the source zone of RDX at Canadian demolition sites. We illustrate RDX's complex multiphysical phenomenon and its environmental behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".