MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conventional and optimized coagulation for NOM removal

2000· article· en· W1577315848 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsAmerican Water (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoagulationTurbidityChemistryWater treatmentTotal organic carbonPulp and paper industryActivated carbonFlocculationChromatographyWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryAdsorptionOrganic chemistryEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bench‐ and full‐scale experiments were conducted to evaluate the optimal coagulation conditions for removal of total organic carbon and disinfection by‐products. The evaluation of 16 sites with optimized coagulation (optimizing the pH of coagulation and then the coagulant dosage) provides an assessment of this coagulation technique and illustrates its capabilities to meet the requirements of the Disinfectants/Disinfection By‐products (D/DBP) Rule. Jar tests were used to determine the effectiveness of optimized coagulation for the removal of organic carbon, DBP precursors, particles, and turbidity when supernatant results were compared with conventional (baseline) treatment. Jar‐test results indicate that optimized coagulation can enhance the removal of organic carbon and DBP precursors.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.203 · 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