MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413289619 · doi:10.1016/j.envc.2025.101271

Tritium plume observations in Lake Huron: measurements of dispersion and comparison of lateral plume structure with the normal distribution of the Gaussian Plume Model

2025· article· en· W4413289619 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Volodymyr Korolevych, Dan Festarini

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Challenges · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAtomic Energy of Canada Limited
KeywordsPlumeDispersion (optics)Atmospheric sciencesGaussianEnvironmental scienceDistribution (mathematics)PanacheGeologyMeteorologyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study describes observations of the near-shore transport and dispersion of routine but intermittent tritium emissions from the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station into Lake Huron, which are used as a tracer for inferring dispersion parameters. Study region covers 45 km along the shore northward, 38 km southward, and 18 km off the shore. Currents were recorded by GPS drifters deployed in the study region, and tritium concentrations in the effluent plume were collected both along drifter trajectories and across them. Two episodes were analysed: one with the plume going into the headwind and one with a regular wind-driven plume. In situ dispersion was calculated from tritium plume observations. The highest concentrations encountered at each distance from the source were combined to locate the plume centreline and deduce scaling (dependence on the distance to the source) according to a power-law fit to these concentrations. Lateral distribution of concentration in the plume was Gaussian Plume Model parameterised with this in situ dispersion and then applied to remaining sampling locations, that is, to all off-centreline observations to model predictions. The headwind episode yielded a scaling exponent of dispersion α = 0.711 and magnitude S y = 11.3, and the episode of a regular wind-driven plume yielded α = 0.411 and S y = 25.9. Gaussian Plume Model from SRS-19 was deployed with these parameters. Across the analyzed region model predictions were characterized by R 2 = 0.34 and Pearson r = 0.36 during the headwind episode and R 2 = 0.72 with r = 0.71 during the regular wind-driven episode.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.226
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ChallengesSame topicRadioactive contamination and transferFrench-language works237,207