Counter-current acid leaching process for copper azole treated wood waste
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the performance of a counter-current leaching process (CCLP) for copper extraction from copper azole treated wood waste for recycling of wood and copper. The leaching process uses three acid leaching steps with 0.1 M H2SO4 at 75degrees C and 15% slurry density followed by three rinses with water. Copper is recovered from the leachate using electrodeposition at 5 amperes (A) for 75 min. Ten counter-current remediation cycles were completed achieving > or = 94% copper extraction from the wood during the 10 cycles; 80-90% of the copper was recovered from the extract solution by electrodeposition. The counter-current leaching process reduced acid consumption by 86% and effluent discharge volume was 12 times lower compared with the same process without use of counter-current leaching. However, the reuse of leachates from one leaching step to another released dissolved organic carbon and caused its build-up in the early cycles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it