MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986213128 · doi:10.5539/ep.v1n2p176

Evaluation of Heavy Metals Leakage from Concretes Containing Municipal Wastewater Sludge

2012· article· en· W1986213128 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elham Shirazi, Reza Marandi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Pollution · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRecycling and utilization of industrial and municipal waste in materials production
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeachateHazardous wasteHeavy metalsDispose patternEnvironmental scienceWaste managementCompressive strengthWastewaterLeaching (pedology)Toxicity characteristic leaching procedureCuring (chemistry)Environmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringMaterials scienceChemistryEngineeringComposite materialSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays an important environmental concern is to dispose of municipal wastewater sludge containing toxic heavy metals. These trace elements could be highly hazardous due to their insolubility, high toxicity, bioaccumulation and carcinogenic characterization. One of the latest common ways of sludge disposal is to use in construction materials such as concrete. The aim of this study is to examine leaching of heavy metals from concretes containing sewage sludge. For this purpose, concrete cubes were constructed with different percentages of wastewater sludge (0, 25, 50, 75, 100) replaced with water. Slump and compressive strength of the samples were measured after curing times of 7, 28 and 90 days. Standard test method of NEN 7345 was used to evaluate the possibility of heavy metals leakage out of concrete including Cr+6, Cu+2, Zn+2, Fe+2, Se+2 and Ba+2. Results presented insignificant amount of heavy metals leaking out of concretes according to EPA standards.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and PollutionSame topicRecycling and utilization of industrial and municipal waste in materials productionFrench-language works237,207