MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W154339682 · doi:10.2175/106143005x73118

Pilot‐Plant Study of Wastewater Sludge Decontamination Using a Ferrous Sulfate Bioleaching Process

2006· article· en· W154339682 on OpenAlexaff
Guy Mercier, Patrick Drogui, Jean‐François Blais, Myriam Chartier

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Environment Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsBioleachingFerrousCadmiumChemistryHuman decontaminationSulfateWastewaterZincPulp and paper industryManganeseEnvironmental chemistryWaste managementCopperEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research was to investigate the performance of the ferrous sulfate bioleaching (FSBL) process in a pilot plant for decontamination and stabilization of wastewater sludge. Batch and continuous experiments, conducted with two 4-m3 bioreactors using indigenous iron-oxidizing bacteria (20% v/v of inoculum) with addition of 4.0 g ferrous sulfate heptahydrate per liter of sludge initially acidified to pH 4.0, were sufficient for effective heavy metal (cadmium, copper, manganese, zinc, and lead) removal yields. The average metal removal yields during the FSBL process were as follows: cadmium (69 to 75%), copper (68 to 70%), manganese (72 to 73%), zinc (65 to 66%), and lead (16%). The FSBL process was also found to be effective in removing both fecal and total coliforms (abatement > 5 to 6 log units). The nutrients content (nitrogen, phosphorus, and magnesium) were also preserved in decontaminated sludge.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Environment ResearchSame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207