MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400683001 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.4c03607

Selenite Stable Isotope Fractionation during Abiotic Reduction by Sodium Sulfide

2024· article· en· W4400683001 on OpenAlexafffund
Heather K. Shrimpton, Carol J. Ptacek, David W. Blowes

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science
KeywordsSeleniumFractionationChemistrySulfideAbiotic componentEnvironmental chemistryStable isotope ratioSodiumReduction (mathematics)Inorganic chemistryNuclear chemistryChromatographyGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reduction of Se(IV) by sulfur reducing bacteria (SRB) can remove Se from groundwater either by direct respiration or the production of H 2 S (g) and subsequent abiotic reduction. This study examined abiotic Se(IV) reduction by H 2 S (g) to determine the associated Se isotope fractionation. The extent of fractionation was compared to the results with studies of Se(IV) reduction in systems containing microorganisms to assess whether these processes could be distinguished. A solution containing Na 2 S was added in increasing concentrations to solutions containing Se(IV) as SeO 3 2– to reduce and precipitate Se. Precipitates with three distinct colors were observed. Powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) results yielded three distinct spectra for each of the three colors of precipitate, which corresponded to Se n S 8– n (orange) or Se(0) (red) and S(0) (yellow). The δ 82 Se values of the residual dissolved Se increased as the aqueous Se concentration decreased. The S/Se in solution affected the isotopic fractionation, with an 82 ε of 10.1 ± 0.6‰ observed for solutions with S/Se < 1.7, and of 7.9 ± 0.3‰ for solutions with S/Se > 1.7.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicCoal and Its By-productsFrench-language works237,207