MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200094790 · doi:10.1520/gtj20210134

Polymer Quantification Methods for Geosynthetic Clay Liners Enhanced with Anionic Polymers

2021· article· en· W4200094790 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Norris, Joseph Scalia, Charles D. Shackelford

Bibliographic record

VenueGeotechnical Testing Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerMaterials scienceBentoniteCarboxymethyl celluloseSodiumPolymer clayComposite materialComposite numberChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Two methods of quantifying the amount of anionic polymer in enhanced bentonites (EBs), total carbon (TC) and loss on ignition (LOI), and several procedures were evaluated. Both methods can be applied to EBs comprising sodium bentonite (NaB) and a polymer. The composite procedure requires the use of a calibration curve created via measurement of the same EBs at varying known polymer contents. The component procedure separates the measurements of the NaB and polymer comprising the EB. The procedures evaluated included component LOI, composite TC, and two component TC procedures, one that measured only TC (component A TC) and another that measured both TC and total inorganic carbon (component B TC). The EBs evaluated included NaB enhanced with one of several anionic polymers, including low-, medium-, and high-molecular-weight poly(acrylic acid), low- and high-viscosity sodium carboxymethyl cellulose, and covalently crosslinked sodium polyacrylate. Polymer contents of geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs) containing EBs after permeation with 500 mM sodium chloride (NaCl) or 167 mM calcium chloride (CaCl2) also were determined, and the results from the different procedures were compared. The component LOI procedure underestimated the actual polymer content of EB regardless of specimen mass or polymer type. The polymer content of nonhydrated EB-GCLs was measured within ±0.1 % (error ≤ ±6.0 %) using the composite TC procedure, corroborating the usefulness of this procedure for determining the polymer content of the EBs in pre-permeated EB-GCLs. The polymer loading of nonhydrated EBs in EB-GCLs also was measured within ±0.3 % (error ≤ ±6.4 %) using the component A TC procedure. In post-permeated EB-GCLs, the composite and component A TC procedures resulted in final polymer contents similar to those for the component B TC procedure (within 0.4–0.8 %). Thus, all three TC procedures were viable for quantifying the polymer content of the post-permeated EB-GCLs.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeotechnical Testing JournalSame topicLandfill Environmental Impact StudiesFrench-language works237,207