Direct Comparison of Fluidized and Packed Bed Bioreactors for Bioremediation of an Air Pollutant
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
A gas-solid fluidized bed bioreactor has been successfully used for the bioremediation of ethanol (a model volatile organic compound, VOC) contaminated air. A key objective of this fluidized bioreactor study was to compare the performance of fluid bed operation to packed bed operation. A fluid bed system increased homogeneity and improved upon operating problems such as plugging and channelling normally associated with packed bed bioreactors. The bioreactor bed was comprised of a mixture of moist sawdust particles and glass spheres. Depending on the superficial velocity of the waste gas stream, the bioreactor could be operated in either packed or fluidized mode. During fluid bed operation, the sawdust and glass sphere mixture was maintained in a bubbling/slugging regime. As expected, fluid bed operation demonstrated significantly higher mass transfer rates but the maximum elimination capacity was 75 g m-3sawdust h-1 as compared to 225 g m-3sawdust h-1 for packed bed operation. In packed bed mode, higher ethanol concentrations were used in order to have comparable ethanol loadings and this may have contributed to faster growth rates and thus faster bioremediation rates.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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