Trends in sediment quality in Hamilton Harbour, Lake Ontario
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bottom sediment quality in Hamilton Harbour was assessed as part of a long-term research and monitoring program over a period of three decades in order to support remedial activities. Sampling locations reflected a range of shoreline activities and sources of chemical contamination to the harbour. An assessment of temporal trends in metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polychlorinated biphenyls indicate that concentrations of all three classes of contaminants have decreased in sediments in most areas of the harbour since the period 1990–2000; however, the Windermere Arm area impacted by historical industrial activities along the southeastern shoreline area of the harbour was an exception, as trends in some metals and polychlorinated biphenyls showed overall increases. Assessment of spatial distributions of contaminants and the associated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and polychlorinated biphenyl profiles showed that Randle Reef and Windermere Arm continue to be significant contributors to harbour-wide contamination by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polychlorinated biphenyls, respectively. Continuation of the program after remedial activities should provide an assessment of the overall efficacy of management actions to improve environmental quality in Hamilton Harbour.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 it