MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036867501 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20325

Integrated process for hydrophobic VOC treatment—solvent choice

2010· article· en· W2036867501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guillaume Darracq, Annabelle Couvert, Catherine Couriol, Abdeltif Amrane, Pierre Le Cloirec

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence de l'Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l'Energie
KeywordsBiodegradationSolventTolueneChemistryAbsorption (acoustics)Volatile organic compoundChemical engineeringOrganic chemistryEnvironmental chemistryMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A process coupling absorption of a gaseous pollutant in an organic phase and biodegradation was considered to treat hydrophobic volatile organic compounds (VOC). The purpose of this work was to choose the best solvent for the absorption of some VOC (dimethylsulfide, dimethyldisulfide, and toluene) and to examine solvent biodegradability as well as VOC biodegradation by activated sludge. Some experiments were carried out on some selected solvents leading to select di‐2‐ethylhexyl‐adipate (DEHA) and poly‐di‐methyl‐siloxane (PDMS) for their high absorption capacity. Biodegradation experiments showed that toluene and DMDS can be removed in solvent on water emulsions, while DMS removal by biodegradation remains to confirm owing to its high volatility. However, experiments showed DEHA biodegradation, contrarily to PDMS which was therefore selected for subsequent experiments.

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)0.001
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicOdor and Emission Control TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207