Exhumation and performance of an Antarctic composite barrier system after 4 years exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Antarctic biopile using a composite liner (high-density polyethylene geomembrane (GMB) over a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL)) was constructed on a coarse granular subgrade to contain hydrocarbon-contaminated soil and leachate. The soil was remediated after 4 years and the biopile was decommissioned. The liner was exhumed to assess the properties and performance of the GMB and GCL. There was no significant change in the GMB index properties. Although cobbles and coarse gravel of the subgrade had left indentations in the GMB, implying tensile strains that could impact long-term performance, there were no holes. There was significant variability in the hydration of the GCL (from 10% to 220%) and in the underlying subgrade soil water content (from 5% to 30%). This reflects the complexity of the subgrade and groundwater flow in the Antarctic environment. The exhumed GCL specimens had low hydraulic conductivity (1 × 10−11 to 7 × 10−11 m/s) at 13 kPa. Soil samples from below the composite liner showed no detectable hydrocarbons and confirmed no migration through the barrier. It is concluded that the composite barrier contained the leachate and biopile soil over the 4 years in service in the extreme Antarctic conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".