MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213862659 · doi:10.1134/s1064229322010100

Guideline Values for the Content of Chemical Elements in Soils of Urban Functional Zones: A Review

2022· review· en· W3213862659 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEurasian Soil Science · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLomonosov Moscow State UniversityRussian Geographical Society
KeywordsArable landStandardizationSoil waterEnvironmental planningLegislationSoil qualityEuropean unionEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental protectionQuality (philosophy)Environmental resource managementGeographyAgricultureBusinessSoil sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract— The Russian soil quality assessment system, where the guideline values for the content of heavy metals and metalloids derived for arable lands (mostly, in terms of the general sanitary indicator of harmfulness) are applied to soils of the residential area and the protected area of water supply sources, can be updated using international experience, e.g., substantiation of generic values for urban functional zones since, with a few exceptions, the Russian soil quality guidelines are the same for all soils of the country. In order to assess the applicability of foreign approaches to Russian realities, we have thoroughly analyzed the original and most developed legislation systems of the soil quality control in cities of Germany, Canada, and the United States, as well as the systems of Australia, New Zealand, Republic of South Africa, and the countries of the European Union, where the values are land use specific. In this paper, we summarize the principles of soil quality assessment for the contents of chemical elements, brief the methodology used in different countries and the consequences of exceeding the standards, and highlight some clues for improving the Russian soil quality assessment system. The Russian soil quality assessment system can be improved and updated by substantiating (i) the land use specific standards for cities with the focus on actual subjects of standardization (the health of ecosystems, children, or adults); (ii) the standards for different geochemical environments taking into account the specific features of migration of substances; and (iii) the standards for the soil materials used to construct lawns and roadside areas. In addition, we suggest (i) developing a comprehensive system of management decisions for the case when soil quality standards are exceeded; (ii) legitimizing the concept of historical pollution that existed before the commencement of business activities; and (iii) establishing the minimum volume of soil and the depth or set of soil horizons to be remediated or removed due to pollution.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.254 · 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