Periwinkle shell: Based granular activated carbon for treatment of chemical oxygen demand (COD) in industrial wastewater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present investigation was undertaken to compare the adsorption efficiency of a low cost adsorbent, periwinkle shell—based granular activated carbon (PSC) with the adsorption efficiency of the commercial activated carbon (CAC) and a ratio 1:1 mixture of PSC and CAC (PSC/CAC) with respect to uptake of the organic components responsible for the chemical oxygen demand (COD) of industrial wastewater. The influence of treatment time, adsorbent dose, pH of the media, agitation speed and adsorbent particle size on the rate of percent COD removal is evaluated. PSC has shown quite effective adsorbent capacity for COD removal with 77.5% efficiency. Though its capacity is slightly lower than that of CAC with 79% efficiency, however the low material cost makes it an attractive option for the treatment of COD. The equilibrium adsorption study can be described by the Linear, Langmuir and Freundlich models. The mechanisms of the rate of adsorption of COD were analysed using the Elovich equation and a pseudo‐second‐order model. The models provided a very high degree of correlation of the experimental adsorption rate data suggesting either model could be used in design applications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".