MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999276374 · doi:10.1080/09593331003743112

Autotrophic nitrogen‐removing biofilms on porous and non‐porous membranes

2010· article· en· W1999276374 on OpenAlexaff
Dominika Celmer‐Repin, Jong Hyuk Hwang, Nazim Çiçek, Jan A. Oleszkiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutotrophDenitrificationNitrificationMembraneBiomass (ecology)WastewaterNitrateChemistryNitrogenSewage treatmentBiofilmBiofoulingChemical engineeringEnvironmental engineeringPulp and paper industryEnvironmental scienceEcologyOrganic chemistryBacteriaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effective removal of nitrogen compounds from wastewater has become a critical issue for treatment plants as the awareness of their negative impact on the environment increased. Autotrophic nitrogen removal has become an interesting alternative to the more conventional heterotrophic processes, as it eliminates the need for an organic carbon addition to the source water and reduces biomass yields. Gas transfer membrane biofilm reactors (MBfR) for nitrification and hydrogen driven denitrification are of special interest as they combine membrane diffusers and biofilms, provide an efficient supply of necessary electron donor for autotrophic removal of ammonia and nitrate, extend solids retention times and retain biomass within the reactor. Subsequently, a wide range of MBfR, which vary based on the type of membrane material and membrane module configuration, are being tested for this purpose. This paper reviews the research to date and also discusses the challenges that still lay ahead before MBfR can be used at treatment plants.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.179 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental TechnologySame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207