MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3134802129 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-3098

Underlying Mechanisms in Groundwater Remediation via In Situ Chemical Oxidation

2021· article· en· W3134802129 on OpenAlexaff
Georgina C. Kalogerakis, Hardiljeet K. Boparai, Brent E. Sleep

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental remediationGroundwater remediationGroundwaterChemistryMineralization (soil science)Aqueous solutionContaminationEnvironmental chemistryGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remediation of groundwater contaminated by organic compounds in porous and fractured media is a persistent and not well understood challenge. In situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) is a remediation technology that delivers oxidants to the subsurface to transform contaminants into benign products. The reactions take place in the aqueous phase where the oxidant comes in contact with the dissolved phase of the contaminant. In this work, we report on the impact of by-product formation on the effectiveness of ISCO. We conducted a series of batch experiments to identify by-products and increase our understanding for time scales required for complete mineralization of petroleum hydrocarbons. This was coupled with micro-CT imaging of column experiments and imaging in a glass fractured rock replica to track the formation of gaseous and solid by-products and determine their effect on flow, transport, and mass transfer. The final aim of this study is to propose novel strategies for improved remediation efficiency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→