MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035056827 · doi:10.2166/wst.2010.980

Anaerobic treatability and biogas production potential of selected in-mill streams

2010· article· en· W2035056827 on OpenAlex
Minqing Ivy Yang, Elizabeth A. Edwards, D. Grant Allen

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicRenewable energy and sustainable power systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSTREAMSBiogasAnaerobic exerciseBiogas productionWaste managementMillAnaerobic digestionEnvironmental scienceProduction (economics)Environmental engineeringEngineeringMethaneChemistryComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biochemical methane potential assays (BMP assays) were performed to study the potential of anaerobic treatment of in-mill wastewaters. The assay results indicated that condensate and the BCTMP effluent, which are currently treated with the anaerobic internal circulation reactors, were the best streams for anaerobic treatment because of their relatively high degradability (>80%) and initial rates of biogas production. The softwood dewatering process stream was the worst with the lowest degradability (~30%). The hardwood stream was more degradable than the softwood stream from the same process. Biogas production was found to be additive and predictable in blended samples. In addition, degradability was found to be negatively correlated to the concentration of dehydroabietic acid and tannin-lignin compounds. The anaerobic treatment of the suitable streams has great potential value with significantly reduced sludge production and energy savings.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.198 · 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