MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911842502

오염복원에 있어서의 계면활성제의 선택

2001· article· ko· W2911842502 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
이달희, Dong-Ju Kim, Sang-Il Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic and Environmental Geology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

계면활성제는 소수성 화합물로 오염된 토양과 대수층을 복원하는데 사용할 수 있다. 본 연구의 목적은 톨루엔으로 오염된 사질토양을 복원하는데 사용될 수 있는 적당한 계면활성제들의 선택과 선택된 계면활성제들이 얼마나 효과적으로 톨루엔을 제거하는가를 연구하는데 있다. 사용된 토양은 Ottawa 사질 토양이며, 이용된 유기오염물질은 톨루엔이었다. 6종의 계면활성제의...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.010

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic and Environmental GeologySame topicMilitary Technology and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207