Bioaccessibility of Uranium\nin Soil Samples from Port\nHope, Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adequate assessment of human health risk of uranium contamination\nat hazardous waste sites, which is an important step in determining\nthe cleanup strategy, is based on bioavailability data. Bioavailability\nof uranium from contaminated soil has not been properly determined\nyet. Bioaccessibility is an in vitro conservative estimate of bioavailability\nand is thus frequently used for site-specific risk assessment. Bioaccessibility\nof uranium was measured in 33 soil samples from the Port Hope area\nin Ontario, Canada, by the physiologically based extraction test (PBET).\nHigher bioaccessibility values in the gastric plus intestinal phase,\n48.4% ± 16.8%, than in the gastric phase, 20.8% ± 11.7%,\nare very probably the result of more efficient extraction of uranium\nfrom soil by intestinal fluid rich in carbonate ions. The observed\nvariability of measured bioaccessibility values is discussed in light\nof the results of scanning electron microscope examination of the\nsoil samples. Uranium bioaccessibility values in both gastric (acidic)\nand gastric plus intestinal (neutral) phases are higher in soil samples\nwith smaller uranium-bearing particles and lower in samples where\nthe uranium-bearing particles are larger. We postulate that the most\nimportant reason for variability of measured bioaccessibility values\nin Port Hope soil samples may be the difference in particle size of\nuranium-bearing particles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.461 | 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 teacher head, 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".