<strong>Relationship of Trace Metal Covariates and pH Distribution in Groundwater within Gold mining and Non-Gold mining Areas in Ghana</strong>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most important defining characteristics of groundwater quality is pH as it fundamentally controls the amount and chemical form of many organic and inorganic solutes in groundwater. Groundwater data are frequently characterized by a wide degree of variability of the factors which possibly influence pH distribution. For this reason, it is challenging to link the spatio-temporal dynamics of pH to a single environmental factor by the ordinary least squares regression technique of the conditional mean. In this study, quantile regression was used to estimate the response of pH to nine environmental factors (As, Cd, Fe, Mn, Pb, turbidity, electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids and nitrates). Results of 25%, 50%, 75% quantile regression and ordinary least squares (OLS) regression were compared. The standard regression of the conditional means (OLS) underestimated the rates of change of pH due to the selected factors in comparison with the regression quantiles. The effect of arsenic increased for sampling locations with higher pH values (higher quantiles) likewise the influence of Pb and Mn. However, the effects of Cd and Fe decreased for sampling locations in higher quantiles. It can be concluded that these detected heterogeneities would be missed if this study had focused exclusively on the conditional means of the pH values. Consequently, quantile regression provides a more comprehensive account of possible spatio-temporal relationships between environmental covariates in groundwater. This study is one of the first to apply this technique on groundwater systems in sub-Saharan Africa. The approach is useful and interesting and has broad application for other mining environments especially tropical low-income countries where climatic conditions can drive rapid cycling or transformations of pollutants. It is also pertinent to geopolitical contexts where regulatory; monitoring and management capacities are weak and where mining pollution of groundwater largely occur.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".