MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011078513 · doi:10.2166/wst.2015.096

Long-term performance of side-stream deammonification in a continuous flow granular-activated sludge process for nitrogen removal from high ammonium wastewater

2015· article· en· W2011078513 on OpenAlexaff
B. Rezania, Donald S. Mavinic, Harlan G. Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivated sludgeChemistryPulp and paper industryHydraulic retention timeBioreactorNitriteWastewaterDewateringBiomass (ecology)NitrificationAmmoniumMixed liquor suspended solidsNitrogenSewage treatmentNitrateMoving bed biofilm reactorWaste managementEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceBiofilmEcologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An innovative granular sludge deammonification system was incorporated into a conventional-activated sludge process. The process incorporated an internal baffle in the bioreactor for continuous separation of granular biomass from flocculent biomass, which allowed for controlling the solids retention time of flocculent sludge. The process was evaluated for ammonium removal from municipal digested sludge dewatering centrate under various operating conditions lasting over 450 days. The process successfully removed, on average, 90% of the ammonium from centrate at various ammonium loading reaching 1.4 kg/m³d at 20 hours hydraulic retention time. Controlling the retention time of the flocculent biomass and maintaining low nitrite concentration were both found to be effective for nitrite oxidizing bacteria management, resulting in a low nitrate concentration (below 50 mg/L) over a wide range of flocculent biomass concentration in the bioreactor.

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 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 score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207