MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2957140729 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2019.104256

Dataset for the assessment of metallic pollution in the Saint-Charles River sediments (Québec City, QC, Canada)

2019· article· en· W2957140729 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Léo Chassiot, Pierre Francus, Arnaud De Coninck, Patrick Lajeunesse, Danielle Cloutier, Thibault Labarre

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersMitacs
KeywordsTributaryPollutionSAINTSedimentEnvironmental scienceSedimentary rockGeologyTrace metalHydrology (agriculture)GeochemistryMetalGeomorphologyGeographyGeotechnical engineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Data in Brief article presents sedimentological and geochemical parameters from a set of sedimentary samples collected in the Saint-Charles River, a tributary of the Saint-Lawrence River flowing in Québec City (QC, Canada). It details the experimental design, methods, materials and results of destructive analyses related to a multi-proxy study of polymetallic contamination in sediments collected within an urban reservoir (Spatial and temporal patterns of metallic pollution in Québec City, Canada: Sources and hazard assessment from reservoir sediment records, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.021, (Chassiot et al., 2019)). The present article summarizes the results of relevant parameters on a set of 68 samples: total organic carbon (TOC), sulfur content, grain-size, and concentrations of heavy and trace metals. It also presents the calculation of enrichment factors, geoaccumulation indexes, and metallic pollution index.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207