MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061101340 · doi:10.1139/s06-053

A comparative study between thermophilic and mesophilic membrane aerated biofilm reactors

2007· article· en· W2061101340 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Baoqiang Liao, Steven N. Liss

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiofilmMesophileThermophileAerationChemical oxygen demandWastewaterChemistryMembranePulp and paper industryChemical engineeringMicrobiologyEnvironmental engineeringBacteriaEnvironmental scienceOrganic chemistryBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of thermophilic membrane aerated biofilm reactor (MABR) was investigated for the first time and examined for its potential to treat a high strength synthetic wastewater. Biofilms at 55 °C were successfully grown on gas permeable silicone hollow fiber membranes. At a feed chemical oxygen demand (COD) of 1200 mg/L and a reaction time of 1 d, COD removal efficiency (90%) of the thermophilic MABR (55 °C) was much higher than that (67%) of the mesophilic MABR operated at 18–28 °C. Biofilms in the thermophilic reactor were less thick, more hydrophobic, and less negatively charged. This study indicated that MABRs operated at thermophilic temperatures could be an effective means for controlling biofilm thickness and for the treatment of warm high strength organic waste.Key words: membrane aerated biofilm reactor, thermophilic biofilm, mesophilic biofilm, biofilm characterization, COD removal.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207