MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W92331480

Evaluation of Heavy Metals Contamination at CFAD Dundurn Resulting from Small-Arms Ammunition Incineration

2001· article· en· W92331480 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sonia Thiboutot, Luc Ampleman, Jeffrey T. Lewis, Sylvie Brochu

Bibliographic record

VenueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmmunitionIncinerationWaste managementContaminationSmall armsEnvironmental scienceHeavy metalsContext (archaeology)PollutantStockpileData scrubbingEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental chemistryChemistryMetallurgyGeologyMaterials science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disposal of surplus, obsolete, or deteriorated small arms ammunition by incineration presents the threat of heavy-metal contamination to the immediate area. The highly toxic nature of these pollutants requires that they be carefully monitored, and that steps be taken to prevent contamination altogether. The safety concerns associated with these pollutants are so serious that the United Kingdom requires stringent environmental licensing of ammunition incineration facilities, and several US states have banned the open burning of restricted materials altogether. In this context, a thorough testing of the area surrounding the small arms ammunition burning facility at CFAD Dundurn was undertaken. Groundwater, soil, and foliage from the area surrounding the burn facility were tested for the presence of heavy metals. Swab samples were taken from surfaces within the facility and these were also tested. Many of the samples showed very high levels of lead, barium, antimony, and other heavy metals. This report details the characterization of the heavy-metals contamination at CFAD Dundurn. The sampling methods are described, and the results are presented. By providing a better understanding of the nature of the problem, it is hoped that this work will help guide the Canadian Forces towards minimizing the possibly serious environmental impact of small-arms ammunition disposal.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC)Same topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207