Removal of isopropyl alcohol (IPA) in UPW by synergistic photocatalytic oxidation and adsorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Earlier work showed that the commercial granular activated carbon (GAC) could effectively remove large non‐polar molecules, but showed poor removal efficiency for small polar compounds such as isopropyl alcohol (IPA) [Schmotzer et al. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2002;4:125; Cong et al. J. Phys. Chem. C 2007;111:6976]. To achieve the goal of increasing the lifetime and removal efficiency of GAC bed for small polar organic compounds in ultrapure water (UPW), the synergistic partial photocatalytic oxidation and adsorption system using commercial GAC coated with nitrogen doped titanium dioxide as an adsorbate was proposed in this work. The influence of operating factors such as UV intensity, flow rate, feed concentration, and the sudden injection of air or inorganic acid on IPA removal efficiency was systematically investigated. Compared to the traditional GAC adsorption bed, at feed total organic carbon (TOC) concentration of 800 ppb, the lifetime of GAC bed in this synergistic photocatalytic oxidation and adsorption system was extended from 348 to 600 min and the outlet TOC concentration was decreased from 793 to 499 ppb. The difference of the TOC outlet concentration in those two configurations was attributed to the photocatalytic effect by GAC coated with nitrogen doped titanium dioxide. The reactions between oxidation radicals and organic contaminants caused the majority of IPA to be decomposed into secondary organic compounds such as acetone and acetone had already been shown a higher affinity to GAC than that of IPA. Experiments also demonstrated the injection of air or inorganic acid in the stream would facilitate the removal of IPA in UPW.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".