MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989480916 · doi:10.2166/aqua.2009.197

Supplementing coagulation with powdered activated carbon as a control strategy for trihalomethanes: application to an existing utility

2009· article· en· W1989480916 on OpenAlexafffund
Annie Carrière, Murielle Vachon, Jean-Luc Bélisle, Benoît Barbeau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Supply Research and Technology—AQUA · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrihalomethaneAlumCoagulationPowdered activated carbon treatmentWater treatmentChemistryActivated carbonAdsorptionOrganic matterTotal organic carbonEnvironmental chemistryPulp and paper industryEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To support a water treatment plant in meeting trihalomethanes (THM) legislation, different THM control strategies using existing treatment processes were investigated. The effectiveness of optimised coagulation and of powdered activated carbon (PAC) (0-25 mg/L) as a mean of supplementing natural organic matter (NOM) removal was assessed. Simultaneous full-scale and bench-scale trials were performed to document THM reductions. At the plant, source and treated water total organic carbon (TOC) was monitored online. At full scale, optimised acidified alum coagulation (3.2 mg/L Al) achieved the maximum NOM removal and the lowest THMFP concentration. Although PAC (11 mg/L) showed a small reduction in TOC (7%) and taste-and odour-causing compounds, results indicated no significant THM reductions. Coagulation and PAC adsorption trials showed a good agreement between bench-scale and plant results.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Supply Research and Technology—AQUASame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207