Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Groundwater discharges in the western Canadian oil sands region impact river water quality. Mapping groundwater discharges to rivers in the oil sands region is important to target water quality monitoring efforts and to ensure injected wastewater and steam remain sequestered rather than eventually resurfacing. Saline springs composed of Pleistocene‐aged glacial meltwater exist in the region, but their spatial distribution has not been mapped comprehensively. Here we show that formation waters discharge into 3 major rivers as they flow through the Athabasca Oil Sands Region adjacent to many active oil sands projects. These discharges increase river chloride concentrations from river headwaters to downstream reaches by factors of ~23 in the Christina River, ~4 in the Clearwater River, and ~5 in the Athabasca River. Our survey provides further evidence for the substantial impact of formation water discharges on river water quality, even though they comprise less than ~2% of total streamflow. Geochemical evidence supporting formation water discharges as the leading control on river salinity include increases in river chloride concentrations, Na/(Na + Ca) ratios, Cl/(Cl + SO 4 ) ratios and decreases in 87 Sr/ 86 Sr ratios; each mixing trend is consistent with saline groundwater discharges sourced from Cretaceous or Devonian aquifers. These regional subsurface‐to‐surface connections signify that injected wastewater or steam may potentially resurface in the future, emphasizing the critical importance of mapping groundwater flow paths to understand present‐day streamflow quality and to predict the potential for injected fluids to resurface.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".