Geospatial Analysis of Chloride Hot Spots and Groundwater Vulnerability in Southern Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elevated chloride (Cl−) concentrations in surface water and groundwater are an increasing concern in cold region urban environments, largely due to long-term road salt application. This study investigates the Cl− distribution across southern Ontario, Canada, using geospatial methods to identify contamination hot spots and assess groundwater vulnerability at both regional and watershed scales. Chloride data from 2001 to 2010 and 2011 to 2020 were compiled from public sources and interpolated using inverse distance weighting. A regional-scale vulnerability index was developed using slope (SL), surficial geology (SG), and land use (LU) (SL-SG-LU), and compared it to a more detailed DRASTIC-LU index within the Credit River watershed. Results show that Cl− hot spots are concentrated in urbanized areas, including the Greater Toronto Area and Golden Horseshoe, with some rural zones also exhibiting elevated concentrations. Vulnerability mapping corresponded well with the observed Cl− patterns and highlighted areas at risk for groundwater discharge to surface waters. While the DRASTIC-LU method offered finer resolution, the simplified SL-SG-LU index effectively captured broad vulnerability trends and is suitable for data-limited regions. This work provides a transferable framework for identifying Cl− risk areas and supports long-term monitoring and management strategies in cold climate watersheds.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".