MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W748644468 · doi:10.1021/bk-2003-0835.ch013

An Approach for Characterizing Arsenic Sources and Risk at Contaminated Sites: Application to Gold Mining Sites in Yellowknife, NWT, Canada

2002· book-chapter· en· W748644468 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kenneth J. Reimer, Christopher A. Ollson, Iris Koch

Bibliographic record

VenueACS symposium series · 2002
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArsenicExtraction (chemistry)Environmental remediationSoil waterEnvironmental chemistryContaminationEnvironmental scienceHuman healthSoil testSoil contaminationMining engineeringGold miningNatural (archaeology)Arsenic contamination of groundwaterSoil scienceGeologyChemistryEcologyEnvironmental healthBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yellowknife, Canada has an extensive soil arsenic contaminant problem as a result of 60 years of gold mining activity. Multivariate statistics (PCA) were used to determine that the natural concentration of arsenic in the area is also elevated (up to 150 ppm). As total arsenic concentrations may overestimate the actual risk posed to ecological and human health, sequential selective extraction (SSE) and a simulated gastric fluid extraction (GFE) were used to assess environmentally available and bioavailable fractions in soils. Subjecting various soil types to these techniques confirmed this hypothesis. The high arsenic content in crushed mine rock was neither environmentally available (<10% for SSE) or bioaccessible (<12% for GFE). Conversely, the low arsenic content in organic soils is more environmentally available (10-50% for SSE) and bioaccessible (>30% for GFE). Collectively, these techniques can be used to identify actual risks and develop effective remediation strategies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS symposium seriesSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207