Groundwater Nitrate in Three Hydrogeologic Settings within Southwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Groundwater nitrate concentrations, along with other hydrogeochemical parameters (e.g. oxidation-reduction potential, dissolved organic carbon, sulfate, isotopes: nitrogen-15 and oxygen-18 in nitrate) were measured at 25 different monitoring wells located at three research sites (Norfolk, Guelph, and Acton), once every two months from June 2014 to July 2016. To identify trends in groundwater nitrate-nitrogen concentrations and to attempt to understand them, the hydrogeologic settings of these three unique sites were characterized by their climate, land use, soil, hydrochemistry, and hydrogeology. The research sites are comprised of; a thick sand and gravel unconfined aquifer; a fractured limestone/dolostone bedrock aquifer; overlain by sand and gravel; and a fractured limestone/dolostone aquifer, overlain by thin diamict. Evidence from groundwater hydrochemical analyses suggests that denitrification may be occurring at some of the deeper monitoring wells while evidence for nitrification was found at shallower depths. By determining which environmental and anthropogenic factors impact nitrate contamination in groundwater land managers can be informed to avoid further contamination of underlying groundwater resources.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".