THE APPLICABILITY OF PASSIVE TREATMENT SYSTEMS FOR THE MITIGATION OF ACID MINE DRAINAGE AT THE WILLIAMS BROTHERS MINE, MARIPOSA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA: BENCH- AND PILOT-SCALE STUDIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Williams Brothers Mine is located in Mariposa County, California. Surface waters from the site drain into the south fork of the Merced River and the San Joaquin River Basin. The mine was developed in the 1980s and mined intermittently until 1996. In 1998, concerns of acidic drainage at the site arose. Effluent sampling by Engineering Remediation Resources Group (ERRG) found acid mine drainage (AMD) characterized by a pH of 3.9, sulphate concentrations of 100 mg/L and low metal concentrations of 0.074, 4.60, 1.23, 0.047 and 0.133 mg/L for Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni and Zn, respectively. The aim of this research was to evaluate passive treatment system alternatives for the mitigation of the AMD to meet water quality objectives for the San Joaquin River Basin. A bench-scale study was undertaken which consisted of 3 systems treating synthetic AMD: (1) a peat biofilter to remove dissolved metals followed by an anoxic limestone drain (ALD) to increase alkalinity and pH; (2) a sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) bioreactor followed by an ALD, in which SRB reduce sulphate to sulfides, generating alkalinity and decreasing metal concentrations via metal sulfide precipitation; and (3) a SRB bioreactor. Synthetic AMD was produced to represent AMD characteristics observed at the site. The peat-
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".