Review and Analysis of Chlorinated Solvent Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Distributions in Five Sandy Aquifers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To select and design effective remedial measures for dense, nonaqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) source zones, better understanding of the architecture of these zones is needed. In this study, a suite of investigative techniques was applied to perform detailed vertical delineation of chlorinated‐solvent source zones in sand aquifers at five contaminated industrial sites (two in Connecticut, and one each in Florida, New Hampshire, and Ontario). The DNAPL occurs in the middle of the aquifers at three of the sites and at or near the bottom at the other two. The DNAPL entered the subsurface at these sites decades ago, and therefore the DNAPL zones have aged due to groundwater dissolution. The suite of investigative techniques was used to perform profile sampling using direct‐push methods, in which depth‐discrete soil and groundwater samples were taken with extremely close vertical spacing. The sampling included methods to distinguish between free‐product and residual DNAPL at two of the sites. At each location where DNAPL was found, the DNAPL occurred in one or a few thin layers, generally between 1 and 30 cm thick. These layers were positioned within distinct grain‐size zones, or at contacts between sedimentological layers. In some cases, the DNAPL layers have no apparent textural association. For any particular sampling hole to have a high probability of finding such layers, continuous cores must be collected and sampling of these cores must be done at very close vertical spacing (5 cm or less). Free‐product DNAPL occurrences in conventional wells at three of the sites indicated, misleadingly, much greater DNAPL layer thicknesses than actual, and in one case, the conventional well may have caused short‐circuiting of DNAPL from the middle to the bottom of the aquifer. Although all of the DNAPL source zones are comprised of only sporadic, thin DNAPL layers representing little total mass, these source zones are the cause of high‐concentration dissolved plumes down gradient.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".