MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100291820

1 Peat groundwater as a medium for surficial geochemical exploration

2016· article· en· W7100291820 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatGroundwaterAlkalinitySaturation (graph theory)Water tableHydrology (agriculture)SedimentSurface water
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Kimberlite-specific chemical responses are visible in shallow peat groundwater over kimberlites from the Attawapiskat region in the James Bay Lowlands, Canada. These chemical responses are visible due to the physical movement of deeper groundwater that has interacted with kimberlite and migrated through the Tyrell Sea sediment into shallow peat groundwater. The presence of elevated values of electrical conductivity, CaCO3 saturation index, Ca, and alkalinity indicate groundwater upwelling. Upwelling groundwaters that have high concentrations of Ni, Cr, Fe, Mg, and REEs are likely due to water-kimberlite rock interactions rather than interactions with limestone, or Tyrell Sea sediment. Some of these elements may behave more conservatively in peat groundwaters and are sometimes observed down the horizontal hydraulic gradient. This study has also determined that it is preferable to collect peat groundwater samples deeper into the saturated zone where waters are more reducing and are likely to have higher concentrations of elements. Increased depth into the saturated zone provides better groundwater geochemical resolution between locations of high element contents and lower contents along transects. More oxidized groundwaters near the surface tend produce oxyhydroxides that can adsorb to peat and lower element concentrations in peat groundwater.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→