Comparative study on membrane fouling between membrane-coupled moving bed biofilm reactor and conventional membrane bioreactor for municipal wastewater treatment
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
This study compared the performance between membrane-coupled moving bed biofilm reactor (M-MBBR) and a conventional membrane bioreactor (MBR) in parallel. Extensive tests were conducted in three pilot-scale experimental units over 6 months. Emphasis was placed on the factors that would affect the performance of membrane filtration. The results showed that the concentrations of soluble microbial product (SMP), colloidal total organic carbon and transparent exopolymer particles in the M-MBBR systems were not significantly different from those in the control MBR system. However, the fouling rates were much higher in the M-MBBR systems as compared to the conventional MBR systems. This indicates membrane fouling potential was related not only to the concentration of SMP, but also to their sources and characteristics. The addition of polyaluminum chloride could reduce the fouling rate of the moving bed biofilm reactor unit by 56.4-84.5% at various membrane fluxes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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