MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095494911

@ 1981, by the American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, Inc. Chemistry of interstitial water and bottom sediments as indicators of seepage patterns in Perch Lake, Chalk River, Ontario’

2015· article· en· W7095494911 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPiezometerAquiferPerchGroundwaterLimnologyHydrology (agriculture)CoringStructural basin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A coring and squeezing technique was used to study seepage processes in Perch Lake. This lake was selected because a portion of the shallow aquifc r in its basin contains tritium, which is an excellent tracer. Tritium analyses of interstitial water samples and well waters from piezometers adjacent to the lake indicate a pattern of grouildwater discharge, or seepage, consistent with the predictions of mathematical simulations. Shallow groundwaters in the aquifer discharge almost vertically into the lake near the shor:; water deeper in the aquifer enters the lake farther from shore. As a result of this groundwater discharge, metals such as iron and manganese arc being deposited in the sediments. Interstitial waters in Perch Lake, especially nearshore, are:goundwaters or groundwaters mixed with lake waters. The chemistry of interstitial waters in lake sediments may thus be determined by the quality of local groundwaters as well as by sediment-water reactions and vertical diffusional mixing. Data from nests of piezorneters nl:ar the lake and from cores or multilevel piczometers in the lake bottom, information abou: bottom sediments, and mea-surements of seepage flux will be needed to estimate the coni ributions to lakes of dissolved components from groundwater discharge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2260.177

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.251 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207