Statistical study of Khibiny Alkaline Massif (Kola Peninsula) groundwater quality with respect to elevated aluminum concentrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current study addresses a problem of elevated aluminum concentrations deteriorating Khibiny Alkaline Massif groundwater quality. The application of chemometric methods to the field dataset 1999–2018 allows to quantitatively describe the groundwater quality, reveal variability patterns and potential sources of elevated aluminum level in the groundwater. The field dataset contains almost 40% more observations of 12 physicochemical groundwater quality parameters than the dataset analyzed in our previous studies on Khibiny groundwater quality assessment reported in the literature. The results revealed statistically significant (α-level=0.05) associations between Al and pH, Cl−, NO3−, SO42− according to the calculated matrix using distance correlation method. The mathematical models developed with the application of multiple regression and factor/principal component analysis elucidate up to 55.5% Al concentration variability and up to 68.3% of total dataset variance. Calculated for the 19-year period the water quality index values, which changed in early 2000s from fair to a marginal category, still belongs to this category reflecting unsatisfactory water quality conditions. Comparing the current study results to the conclusions drawn in our previous publications it is assumed that the main factors determining substandard groundwater quality have remained the same since last groundwater quality assessment reported in the literature. The examined combination of chemometric methods allows to gain insight into the main features of variability patterns of water quality characteristics and the potential sources of groundwater contamination. This approach forms a reliable foundation for enhancing groundwater quality monitoring and control in the Arctic region of interest and other locations experiencing similar problems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".