Seasonal hydrology and gas transport in a composite cover on sulfide tailings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents the field performance of a five-layer composite cover to mitigate acid mine drainage in legacy sulfide tailings in northern Ontario, Canada. Installed in 2008, this cover comprised sand, clay, geosynthetic clay liner, sand, and waste rock layers. To evaluate the effectiveness of the cover in reducing water and oxygen ingress, groundwater and vadose zone hydrological characterization, stable water isotope analysis, pore-gas measurements, oxygen flux calculations, and variably saturated flow modeling were conducted. The results indicate that the clay layer stayed nearly saturated in the spring, fall, and winter, but temporary desiccation occurred during the summer. Compared to uncovered tailings, the cover significantly lowered diffusive oxygen flux. In the summer, fall, and winter, the capillary barrier effect of the cover functioned effectively and inhibited percolation. Atmospheric pore-gas oxygen concentrations at one out of the three monitoring locations indicate potential cover imperfections that enabled oxygen transport into the tailings. In the spring and early summer, snowmelt infiltration resulted in percolation that compromised the capillary barrier effect, as well as lateral drainage. The resulting increase in water saturation in the cover limited oxygen transport. Despite potential cover imperfections, this composite cover reduced oxygen and water ingress a decade after installation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".