MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1961198492 · doi:10.1002/cite.201500080

Reuse of Air for Return Activated Sludge Pumping in Submerged Membrane Bioreactors

2015· article· en· W1961198492 on OpenAlexafffund
Christina Starke, Pierre R. Bérubé

Bibliographic record

VenueChemie Ingenieur Technik · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAirliftSpargingReuseBioreactorMembrane bioreactorActivated sludgeEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringWaste managementProcess engineeringEngineeringChemistrySewage treatment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The reuse of air added for gas sparging to airlift return activated sludge (RAS) in a membrane bioreactor (MBR) was investigated. Numerical modeling suggests that the RAS conveyance requirements in an MBR could be met for systems with a treatment capacity of ≤3.8 · 106 L d−1, and potentially for larger MBRs, depending on the system design (i.e., U‐shaped rather than linear systems). Pilot scale validation confirmed that airlift could be used to meet the RAS conveyance requirements. Optimal conditions were obtained for pilot scale systems with square air collectors, intermediate/large air collector angles, greater depth of submergence and individual tubing to redirect the airlifted flow. Implementation of airlift RAS conveyance in small to intermediate size MBRs can results in a reduction of approximately 20 % in operating costs.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemie Ingenieur TechnikSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207