MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043742251 · doi:10.5004/dwt.2010.1663

Ripening of granular media filters for pretreatment of seawater in membrane desalination

2010· article· en· W2043742251 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matan Beery, Ji Jung Lee, Joon Ha Kim, Jens‐Uwe Repke

Bibliographic record

VenueDesalination and Water Treatment · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsFiltration (mathematics)SeawaterTurbidityEffluentReverse osmosisFilter (signal processing)ChemistryDesalinationChromatographySuspended solidsMembraneAdsorptionPulp and paper industrySand filterPilot plantWater treatmentEnvironmental engineeringActivated carbonEnvironmental scienceWastewaterEngineeringMathematicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The successful operation of a seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant depends greatly on the performance of the pretreatment step. The start-up of a pretreatment filtration process usually begins with a dynamic part called ripening, during which the filter media increases its adsorption ability and improves the removal of foulants from the seawater. In that period (typically lasting 30–60 min, depending on the system's conditions) the effluent often does not meet the quality requirements of the RO membranes and must often be disposed of. An observation and analysis of the ripening phenomena was performed using lab scale acrylic filter columns containing granular activated carbon. The seawater originated from the Yellow Sea in Korea and an inline coagulation was performed prior to filtration using an optimal dose of FeCl3 based on a jar test. The turbidity, total suspended solids concentration and dissolved organic carbon were measured before and after filtration with the goal of assessing the filtration performance. The filter media, which was cleaned and dried before filtration showed distinct ripening characteristics. The measurements were then used for parameter identification of a typical filtration model. Based on the fitted model one can predict the optimal filter depth that would reduce the waste stream production of the plant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueDesalination and Water TreatmentSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207