MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Class A Pathogen Reduction in the SSDML Process

2001· article· en· W2067482346 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-François Blais, Frédéric Shooner, R. D. Tyagi, Nathan Munier, Ambarish S. Vidyarthi, R. Y. Surampalli

Bibliographic record

VenuePractice Periodical of Hazardous Toxic and Radioactive Waste Management · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsGDG EnvironnementInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueInstitut National d'Optique
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsMesophileSewage sludgeFecal coliformSewageBioreactorAerobic digestionPulp and paper industryMicroorganismSewage sludge treatmentSewage treatmentEnvironmental scienceBiosolidsAnaerobic digestionChemistryWaste managementActivated sludgeEnvironmental engineeringBiologyBacteriaEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The agricultural use of sewage sludge is limited by the presence of toxic metals and pathogens. The simultaneous sludge digestion and metal leaching (SSDML) process has been developed to resolve this problem. In the present study, the performance of the SSDML process for the elimination of total coliforms, fecal coliforms, fecal streptococci, and coliphages from sewage sludge was verified by shake flask, laboratory bioreactor, and pilot plant bioreactors. The effect of pH, sludge solids concentration, temperature, and sludge types on the bacterial indicator's removal was evaluated. The results showed that the SSDML process was more efficient than the conventional mesophilic aerobic sludge digestion process for the elimination of bacterial (2.5 to >7.0 log units reduction) and viral (>8.0 log units reduction) indicator microorganisms.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations13
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractice Periodical of Hazardous Toxic and Radioactive Waste ManagementSame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207