Rapid assessment of heavy metal pollution using ion-exchange resin sachets and micro-XRF core-scanning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Conventional pollution monitoring strategies for heavy metals are often costly and unpractical. Innovative sampling and analytical approaches are therefore needed to efficiently monitor large areas. This study presents a novel, simple, fast, and inexpensive method to monitor heavy metal pollution that uses cation-exchange resin sachets and the micro-XRF core-scanning technique (XRF-CS). The resin passive samplers act as concentrators of cationic species and can be readily deployed spatially and temporally to record pollution signals. The large number of analytical tasks are then overcome by the fast and non-destructive XRF-CS to precisely assess elemental concentrations. Quantifying element loading involves direct comparison with a set of identically prepared and scanned resin reference standards containing Ca, Ti, Cr, Mn, Ni, Cu, Zn, Pb. The results show that within the test range (from 0–1000 s mg kg −1 ), the calibration lines have excellent regressions (R 2 ≥ 0.97), even at the shortest exposure time (1 s). A pilot field survey of a suspected polluted area in central Taiwan, where 30 resin sachets had been deployed, identified a pollution hot spot in a rapid and economical manner. Therefore, this approach has the potential to become a valuable tool in environmental monitoring and forensics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".