MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081268544 · doi:10.2166/wst.2010.974

Enhancing biological phosphorus removal with glycerol

2010· article· en· W2081268544 on OpenAlexaff
Qiuyan Yuan, Richard Sparling, P. F. Lagasse, Y. M. Lee, Doug Taniguchi, Jan A. Oleszkiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsAecom (Canada)University of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnhanced biological phosphorus removalGlycerolIndustrial fermentationActivated sludgeChemistryPhosphorusPulp and paper industryWaste managementSewage treatmentFermentationFood scienceBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An enhanced biological phosphorus removal process (EBPR) was successfully operated in presence of acetate. When glycerol was substituted for acetate in the feed the EBPR process failed. Subsequently waste activated sludge (WAS) from the reactor was removed to an off-line fermenter. The same amount of glycerol was added to the WAS fermenter which led to significant volatile fatty acids (VFA) production. By supplying the system with the VFA-enriched supernatant of the fermentate, biological phosphorus removal was enhanced. It was concluded that, if glycerol was to be used as an external carbon source in EBPR, the effective approach was to ferment glycerol with waste activated sludge.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207