MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235395428 · doi:10.12943/anr.2013.0022

Vol 2, no. 2

2014· article· en· W4235395428 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Donna Rowan, J. Carr, R. Silke, S Kim, M. Bredlaw, Volodymyr Korolevych, W Matysiak, J. Atanackovic, Hedieh K. Mohseni, Soo Hyun Byun, Michael Inskip, W. V. Prestwich, Nicholas D. Priest, K. Chin, David Cowan, David R. Chettle, A.L.M. Ethier, J. Whynot, N O'connor, N. A. Briden, Michael Bond, Glory Ikponmwosa Edwards, B. Hyland, C Kitson, T. Chschyolkova, Jennifer M. Olfert, M. Audet, D.R.W. Killey

Bibliographic record

VenueAECL Nuclear Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcMaster UniversityAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Ottawa River contamination is historical and resides in sediment, ecological risk and trophic transfer depend on linkages between sediment and biota. One of the ways in which this linkage is quantified is through the use of the biota sediment accumulation factor (BSAF). In this study, we present the first field estimates of BSAF for a number of radionuclides. The strongest and most consistent BSAFs were those for 137 Cs in deposit feeding taxa, suggesting that sediment concentrations rather than dissolved concentrations drive uptake. For crayfish and unionid bivalves that do not feed on sediment, biota radionuclide concentrations were not related to sediment concentrations, but rather reflected concentrations in water. BSAFs would not be appropriate for these non-deposit feeding biota. BSAFs for 137 Cs were not significantly different among deposit feeding taxa, suggesting similar processes for ingestion, assimilation and elimination. These data also show that the concentration factor approach used for guidance would have led to spurious results in this study for deposit feeding benthic invertebrates. Concentrations of 137 Cs in Hexagenia downstream of the CRL process outfall range by about 2-orders of magnitude, in comparison to relatively uniform water concentrations. The concentration factor approach would have predicted a single value downstream of CRL, underestimating exposure to Hexagenia by almost 2-orders of magnitude at sites close the CRL process outfall.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

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)0.0370.052

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.201 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAECL Nuclear ReviewSame topicRadioactive contamination and transferFrench-language works237,207