MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805585382 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2001.001

A Computer Simulation of Water Quality Change Due to Dredging of Heavy Metals Contaminated Sediments in the Old Harbour of Montreal

2001· article· en· W2805585382 on OpenAlexaffabout
Antonina Degtiareva, Maria Elektorowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDredgingWater columnAnoxic watersEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceWater qualitySedimentGenetic algorithmEnvironmental engineeringChemistryGeologyOceanographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aquatic sediments accumulate heavy metals that are discharged into the environment. This study investigates possible water quality changes due to release of heavy metals such as Cd, Ni, Zn and Pb into the water column during dredging of anoxic sediments in the Old Harbour of Montreal. An environmental impact assessment of the sediment removal requires estimating the speciation of heavy metals in the water column with and without the solid phase. Chemical equilibria in the St. Lawrence River water are calculated using the program EQUILIB from the software FACT. Results show that the water is oversaturated with respect to CaMg(CO3)2 and Fe(OH)3. It is speculated that (ZnO)(Fe2O3) and (NiO)(Fe2O3) control the solubility of Zn and Ni in the water. The speciation of heavy metals in pore water of anoxic sediments is calculated, taking into account that the corresponding sulfides are solid phases and control their solubility. The impact of various scenarios on the area of concern is reviewed from an ecotoxicological perspective. Dredging might change the redox and acid-base conditions in the water column. Dredging can lead to an increase in the concentration of heavy metals in the water column and a change of metal speciation, but its impact will be less visible if the sediments contain high levels of calcium acting as a buffer.

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 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)0.025
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207