MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075822480 · doi:10.1080/09593332208618216

Extraction of Cr(III) and Other Metals from Tannery Sludge by Mineral Acids

2001· article· en· W2075822480 on OpenAlexaff
Shaobo Shen, R. D. Tyagi, Jean-François Blais

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Technology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicChromium effects and bioremediation
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaching (pedology)ChemistryExtraction (chemistry)ChromiumMetalYield (engineering)AdsorptionNuclear chemistryMetallurgyChromatographyMaterials scienceSoil waterOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A comprehensive investigation on the extraction conditions of Cr(III) and other metals from tannery sludge using mineral acids was performed. The effect of various factors (the extraction time, the type of mineral acid, the consumption of acid, pH, sludge solids concentration, temperature, and the type of sludge) on the leaching yield of metals was studied. The results indicate that the metal extraction time for most of the metals was 2h at 25 degrees C. The most suitable acid for Cr(III) extraction was sulphuric acid. A relationship for the acid requirement to adjust different sludge pH at varying sludge solids concentration was established. The leaching yield of chromium varied with sludge pH and the suitable pH for Cr(III) extraction was between 2.0 to 3.0. The optimum sludge solids concentration for Cr(III) extraction was 78.5 g x l(-1). The leaching yield of Cr(III) decreased with the increased temperature. The type of sludge (wet or dry) has no effect on the leaching yield of Cr(III) The metal adsorption and bonding on the insoluble organic colloid matter as well as the formation of metal precipitates may be two possible reasons for the decreased extraction yield of metals with increased solids concentration.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations33
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental TechnologySame topicChromium effects and bioremediationFrench-language works237,207