MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1220538268 · doi:10.2166/wst.2015.193

Anaerobic digestion of wastewater from the fruit juice industry: experiments and modeling

2015· article· en· W1220538268 on OpenAlexaff
Souhaib Zerrouki, Rachida Rihani, Fatiha Bentahar, Khaled Belkacemi

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiogasChemical oxygen demandChemistryAnaerobic digestionPulp and paper industryWastewaterFermentationMesophileBiomass (ecology)Organic matterSulfiteNutrientMethaneFood scienceWaste managementEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringAgronomyBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anaerobic digestion of wastewater from the fruit juice industry was carried out in a batch digester. To study the effect of the pH values as well as the nutrient medium on the fermentation process, different parameters were monitored under mesophilic temperature, such as cumulative biogas volume, chemical oxygen demand (COD), total sugar, and biomass growth. It was found that for all cases, the COD concentration decreased with time. The lowest value reached was obtained when the nutrient medium was added; it was about 110 g/L after 480 h. In such cases, the COD removal reached about 80%; the highest cumulative biogas volume of about 5,515.8 NmL was reached after 480 h testing; and the lowest value reached was about 2,862.3 NmL in the case of peach-substrate containing sodium sulfite. The addition of nutrient medium improved the cumulative biogas production as well as the COD abatement. Measurement of the biogas composition highlighted three gaseous components, namely, methane (56.52%), carbon dioxide (20.14%), and hydrogen sulfide (23.34%). The modified Gompertz equation and the first-order kinetic model were used to describe the cumulative biogas production and the organic matter removal, respectively. A good agreement was found between simulated and experimental data.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionFrench-language works237,207