MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981361476 · doi:10.4095/289911

Total arsenic concentrations of lake sediments near the city of Yellowknife, Northwest Territories

2012· report· en· W2981361476 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer M. Galloway, Hamed Sanei, R. Timothy Patterson, T Mosstajiri, Thomas Hadlari, Hendrik Falck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyArsenicGeochemistryArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on recent geoscience data collected by the Geological Survey of Canada in collaboration with Northwest Territories Geoscience Office and Carleton University. Fifty sediment-water interface samples from 19 lakes were collected between July and August 2009 along a 90 km east-west transect and analyzed for grain size, organic matter, nutrients, and metals. The work was undertaken to establish a dataset to contribute to the determination of natural variability of arsenic in freshwater sediments in the Yellowknife area, Northwest Territories. Geochemistry results of lake sediments are compared to previous work, bedrock geochemistry where available, and the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Interim Sediment Quality Guidelines and Probable Effects Levels for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Concentrations of arsenic in bulk lake sediment samples are elevated above Interim Sediment Quality Quidelines and Probable Effects Levels in lakes located west of the city of Yellowknife. These lakes occur on granitoid bedrock, which contain low arsenic relative to other bedrock types in the study region. The spatial pattern of arsenic in lake sediments is consistent with aerial dispersion of emitted particulates from mine smelting point sources and transportation by prevailing winds west of the city of Yellowknife.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207