MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801694874 · doi:10.1144/sp479.8

Multiple lines of field evidence to inform fracture network connectivity at a shale site contaminated with dense non-aqueous phase liquids

2018· article· en· W2801694874 on OpenAlexaff
Beth L. Parker, Steven Chapman, Kenneth J. Goldstein, John A. Cherry

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society London Special Publications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersU.S. Army Corps of Engineers
KeywordsOil shaleContaminationFracture (geology)Phase (matter)Field (mathematics)GeologyEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringGeotechnical engineeringChemistryPaleontologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conceptual models of the fracture networks in shale were evaluated at a site contaminated with chlorinated solvents. Prior borehole testing in eight holes under open hole ambient and pumping conditions identified 14 flow zones (140 m bedrock interval) with zero to five zones per hole. Cross-hole testing showed only a few cross-connections between transmissive fractures. The initial conceptual model thus featured a sparse fracture network with few dominant fractures. Detailed profiles (hydraulic head, rock core volatile organic compounds, groundwater volatile organic compounds from packer and multi-level sampling, cross-hole multi-level monitoring of permanganate injections) were collected from several holes and indicated a well-connected fracture network with many hydraulically active fractures not influenced by open hole cross-connection. This contrasting conceptual model contained numerous well-connected horizontal and vertical fractures that allowed chlorinated solvents to penetrate the upper 50–60 m of bedrock as dense non-aqueous phase liquids, followed by diffusion-driven mass transfer from fractures into the porous rock matrix, such that nearly all the contaminant mass resided as dissolved and sorbed phases, measurable in rock core without cross-contamination during drilling. The difference in the two conceptual models has important implications for source zone and plume attenuation.

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)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society London Special PublicationsSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207