MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132899141

Microcosm Characterization of Microbial Sulfur and Carbon Interactions within the First Pilot Oil Sands Pit Lake, Base Mine Lake

2024· dissertation· W7132899141 on OpenAlexaff
Yingzhe Li

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsHudbay Minerals (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethanogenesisTailingsSulfurOil sandsCarbon fibersMicrocosmSulfateMethaneOxygen
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This experimental study examined sulfur reduction, methanogenesis, anaerobic oxidation of methane and their relative responses to labile organic carbon amendment (lactate and microal-gae) in simulated oil sands pit lake (PL; Base Mine Lake; BML) fluid fine tailings- water inter-face (FWI) microcosms. Respective sulfate reduction and methanogenesis rates of 1.7 and 1.1 μmol/L/day both increased up to 240 μmol/L/day with labile organic carbon supplementa-tion. Further, sulfur reduction inhibited methanogenesis under labile carbon limiting conditions, but increased methanogenesis under high labile carbon loads. Increasing the rates of both pro-cesses pose a risk to BML water cap oxygen dynamics associated with the generation of oxygen consuming constituents, sulfide, and methane. Results identify that managing the balance be-tween oxygen producing primary production and subsequent oxygen consumption through aer-obic and anaerobic algal biomass decomposition will be critical to prevent increasing episodic anoxia currently observed in BML, informing future PL design as a fluid fine tailings (FFT) closure reclamation strategy.

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 score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207