MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959394950 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b02373.s001

Accumulating\nMercury and Methylmercury Burdens in\nWatersheds Impacted by Oil Sands Pollution

2019· article· en· W6959394950 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Computing and Data Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOil sandsSnowpackMercury (programming language)MethylmercuryWatershedPollutionWater quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bitumen mining and\nupgrading in northeastern Alberta, Canada, releases\ntoxic pollutants into the atmosphere, including mercury (Hg) and methylmercury\n(MeHg). This Hg and MeHg is then deposited to the surrounding landscape;\nhowever, the fate of these contaminants remains unknown. Here, we\ncompare snowpack chemistry to high-frequency measurements of river\nwater quality across six watersheds (five impacted by oil sands development\nand one unimpacted). Catchment scale snowpack Hg and MeHg loads normalized\nto watershed area were highest near oil sands operations. River water\nHg concentrations and loads tracked discharge and tended to be higher\ndownstream of mining operations, while MeHg concentrations and loads\nincreased through the summer, reflecting peak summer MeHg production\nrates. Except in the reference watershed, snowpack Hg and MeHg loads\nequaled or exceeded the amount of Hg and MeHg exported during freshet\nand, in some cases, the entire hydrologic year. This suggests landscapes\nacross the oil sands region, which are dominated by low-relief wetlands\nand other shallow-water systems, are accumulating Hg and MeHg. Importantly,\nduring years of high discharge, these low-relief systems appear to\nbecome better connected and flush MeHg (and Hg) from the watershed.\nThus, these watersheds may act as temporary, rather than as permanent,\nnatural repositories of oil sands contaminants.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.004

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicScientific Computing and Data ManagementFrench-language works237,207