A comparative study between thermophilic and mesophilic membrane aerated biofilm reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".