MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200394848 · doi:10.4236/gep.2021.912016

Geotechnical and Geochemical Assessment of Natural Sands in Ahanta West Area, Southwestern Ghana

2021· article· en· W4200394848 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

VenueJournal of Geoscience and Environment Protection · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiltPermeameterGeotechnical engineeringSpecific gravityPermeability (electromagnetism)Water contentGeologyGranulometryEnvironmental scienceMineralogySoil scienceSoil waterHydraulic conductivityGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geotechnical and geochemical assessment of natural sands being used as fine aggregates for construction purposes in Ahanta West and its Environs was carried out, as well as addressing the environmental problems associated with the exploitation of these sand through the sand winning activities. The results from geotechnical and geochemical tests were bench marked with British, American and Ottawa Standards for testing materials. Representative samples were taken from five different sand winning sites namely, Pompuni, Agona Banso, Fretsi, Tumentu stream and Fretsi river. The geotechnical tests carried out were specific gravity, grain size analysis, moisture content, silt content, permeability test using the constant head permeameter method. The photometer (Hydro Test HT 1000) was used to determine silica, sulphate and chloride concentrations in the sand samples. The oxides for the geochemical analysis were determined using the X-ray fluorescence (XRF) method. The results from the study areas showed that except for Fretsi, the specific gravity, grain size analysis, moisture content, silt content and permeability tests were within the acceptable range for natural sands. Sand samples from Pumponi and Agona Banso had the required Cu and Cc values of being well graded. Sulphate and chloride concentrations were within standards for all the samples; however, silica was low for all the samples. Fe2O3, Al2O3, MnO and Na2O did not meet the Ottawa sand standard. Natural sand is not recommended to be used for construction purposes however, these sands may be treated or blended if it is to be used for construction purposes. There are serious environmental implications for the sand-winning activities in the study areas such as stripped overburden, creation of pits and ponds, increased total suspended solids in surface waters, and destruction of aquatic habitats which needs to be addressed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · 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