MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Removal of Natural Dyes from Tie Dye Effluent by Coagulation Process

2015· article· en· W2059877061 on OpenAlexaff
Witthaya Mekhum, Torpong Kreetachat, Kowit Suwannahong, Chaisri Tarasawatpipat

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mechanics and Materials · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Research Council of Thailand
KeywordsWastewaterEffluentSewage treatmentBark (sound)Waste managementEnvironmental scienceAlumPulp and paper industryEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringChemistryGeographyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to find the efficiency ways to treat wastewater from dye tie dye technique by using an effective wastewater treatment system and find out how to implant the technology of the waste water treatment system to help the problems of the community activities which the tie-dye fabric were the major product of their area. The wastewater from the tie-dye industry were collected and were treated with physical, chemistry and biological treatment by using local materials such as sea shell, alum and clay in a laboratory scale. The data from the treatment were used in the designing the small scale water treatment and apply to the study area. Moreover, the treatment technique knowledge will transfer to the community and establish guidelines for community Wastewater treatment. The COD of wastewater from the dying materials of Bark of Xylocarpus granatum, Bark of Sea almond and Bark of Ebony tree seed were 479.2, 428.5, and 564.2 mg/l, respectively. The water quality were improved better up to 83.61% after were treated with the treatment technique. The satisfaction of the community that participate in the training, technology transfer and adoption of guidelines for therapists to use in the community were found that 86 percent had gained the knowledge in wastewater treatment, 95 percent were satisfied and 85 percent of knowledge were benefit to the community, respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Mechanics and MaterialsSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207