A calibration protocol of a one-dimensional moving bed bioreactor (MBBR) dynamic model for nitrogen removal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work suggests a procedure to correctly calibrate the parameters of a one-dimensional MBBR dynamic model in nitrification treatment. The study deals with the MBBR configuration with two reactors in series, one for carbon treatment and the other for nitrogen treatment. Because of the influence of the first reactor on the second one, the approach needs a specific calibration strategy. Firstly, a comparison between measured values and simulated ones obtained with default parameters has been carried out. Simulated values of filtered COD, NH(4)-N and dissolved oxygen are underestimated and nitrates are overestimated compared with observed data. Thus, nitrifying rate and oxygen transfer into the biofilm are overvalued. Secondly, a sensitivity analysis was carried out for parameters and for COD fractionation. It revealed three classes of sensitive parameters: physical, diffusional and kinetic. Then a calibration protocol of the MBBR dynamic model was proposed. It was successfully tested on data recorded at a pilot-scale plant and a calibrated set of values was obtained for four parameters: the maximum biofilm thickness, the detachment rate, the maximum autotrophic growth rate and the oxygen transfer rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".