Assessing groundwater vulnerability to unconventional resources development in southern New Brunswick
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Collected information during 2017-2018 provided interesting and unexpected results. For instance: 1) borehole logging in wells drilled with two different techniques provided different results. Thus, two additional wells will be drilled next year to provide more info. This represents a great opportunity to reconcile data, as hammer-drilled wells are much less expensive than diamonddrilled wells, but validity of data from the former wells needs to be ascertained; 2) results from barometric and water-level monitoring provided new information for the interpretation of the confinement conditions (unconfined, semi-confined or confined) of each well; 3) Regular groundwater monitoring revealed that, contrary to what the traditional indicators such as gas dryness ratio and delta-13C(CH4) seemed to indicate, only one well would in fact contain thermogenic gas, while the other thermogenic?like samples would rather correspond to microbial methane affected by oxidation, based on calculations using documented isotopic fractionation factors; 4) The study of the re-processed seismic lines led to the re?intepretation of the deformation of evaporite deposits of the Windsor Group and its impact on sedimentary packages.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".