MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039500499 · doi:10.1080/10643389.2011.592764

Biofiltration for BTEX Removal

2012· article· en· W2039500499 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofilterBTEXEthylbenzeneContext (archaeology)Environmental scienceVolatile organic compoundEnvironmental chemistryPollutantEnvironmental engineeringFiltration (mathematics)ChemistryWaste managementTolueneEngineeringMathematicsOrganic chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) biofiltration is an increasingly popular research area because it offers a relatively cheap solution to limit emissions of these toxic agents to the atmosphere. The authors review different technological options for biofiltration, and discuss the main influencing factors including type of packing material, temperature, moisture content and pH of the biofilter packing, influent conditions, and nutrient status. Whenever relevant, these factors are discussed in the context of biofilter ecology, and microbiology of BTEX biofiltration is briefly outlined. The kinetics of BTEX biofiltration are discussed, and the main simulation models developed for this system are presented. Insights on biofiltration of other compounds are also included to complement the available information. The review concludes with a brief outline of some operational challenges.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.278 · 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