MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319873054 · doi:10.1016/j.gexplo.2023.107178

Quantifying excess heavy metal concentrations in drainage basins using conservative mixing models

2023· article· en· W4319873054 on OpenAlex
Jonas Eschenfelder, Alex Lipp, G.G. Roberts

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geochemical Exploration · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrainage basinSedimentTrace elementEnvironmental scienceDrainageHydrology (agriculture)STREAMSBaseline (sea)GeologyStructural basinFluvialPollutantRange (aeronautics)GeomorphologyGeochemistryChemistryEcologyOceanographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High concentrations of heavy metals and other pollutants in river sediments can have detrimental effects on the ecosystem and humans. The composition of river sediments throughout drainage basins therefore provides important information for environmental monitoring. An obvious first step for using river sediment compositions for monitoring is to quantify natural baseline concentrations. Once baselines have been quantified, is it straightforward to compare them to observations to identify excesses generated by, for example, anthropogenic inputs. In this study a new strategy for mapping element concentrations along rivers from discrete geochemical observations upstream is presented. We demonstrate our approach in a case study of the Clyde drainage basin in western Scotland, UK. First, continuous baselines are generated using simple forward models that conservatively mix source region concentrations along drainage networks. 1185 measurements of elemental concentrations from first-order streams are used to parameterise the source region. The calculated baselines are then compared to concentrations measured at 60 localities along the main channel of the Clyde river. For a range of major and trace elements (e.g., Mg, Sr, K, Mn), the downstream observations are in close agreement with baseline concentrations predicted by conservative mixing models. However, some heavy metal concentrations (Pb, Cu, Zn) tend to exceed predicted baseline concentrations. Therefore, the second part of our approach calculates element concentrations in source areas required to match the observed Pb, Cu and Zn concentrations measured along the river. An inverse approach is used to ‘unmix’ the observed concentrations utilising, again, a conservative mixing model. Model resolution is determined by the spatial distribution of the data. Resultant calculated natural baselines and heavy metal concentrations along the river can easily be compared to estimate excesses. We tentatively suggest that anthropogenic input to sediment composition along the river is equivalent to annual fluxes of 9.7, 1.5 and 5.7 t (106 g) of Pb, Cu and Zn, respectively.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.160 · 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