MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063212999 · doi:10.1002/env.900

Enhanced process monitoring for wastewater treatment systems

2007· article· en· W2063212999 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

VenueEnvironmetrics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRedundancy (engineering)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Scheme (mathematics)Reliability (semiconductor)Continuous monitoringReal-time computingWireless sensor networkReliability engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) remain notorious for poor data quality and sensor reliability problems due to the hostile environment, missing data problems and more. Many sensors in WWTP are prone to malfunctions in harsh environments. If a WWTP contains any redundancy between sensors, monitoring methods with sensor reconstruction such as the proposed one can yield a better monitoring efficiency than without a reconstruction scheme. An enhanced robust process monitoring method combined with a sensor reconstruction scheme to tackle the sensor failure problems is proposed for biological wastewater treatment systems. The proposed method is applied to a single reactor for high activity ammonia removal over nitrite (SHARON) process. It shows robust monitoring performance in the presence of sensor faults and produces few false alarms. Moreover, it enables us to keep the monitoring system running in the case of sensor failures. This guaranteed continuity of the monitoring scheme is a necessary development in view of real‐time applications in full‐scale WWTPs. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
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