MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979795923 · doi:10.5942/jawwa.2014.106.0107

Assessment of biomass in drinking water biofilters by adenosine triphosphate

2014· article· en· W1979795923 on OpenAlexafffund
Lizanne Pharand, Michele I. Van Dyke, William B. Anderson, Peter M. Huck

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsBiofilterEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)Adenosine triphosphatePulp and paper industryCarbon sourceEnvironmental engineeringChemistryBiologyEcologyBiochemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biofilters have gained in popularity for drinking water treatment for reasons that include reducing disinfectant demand, disinfection by‐product formation, and regrowth in distribution systems. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) detection is being used more frequently as an easy and rapid method to quantify viable biomass in biofilters; however, there is little information on the relationship of ATP levels to biofiltration parameters and performance. In this study, a comprehensive comparison of published ATP data was conducted, which found that concentrations at the top of active, acclimated biofilters typically were in the range of 10 2 to 10 3 ng ATP/cm 3 media. The effect of various biofilter parameters (source water characteristics and quality, pretreatment, hydraulic loading rate, temperature, and sampling depth) on ATP levels is discussed and evaluated using published ATP data. The authors also assess the relationship between ATP and biofilter performance in terms of carbon removal and identify a need for further research in this area.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations89
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Water Works AssociationSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207