MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088895097 · doi:10.5942/jawwa.2013.105.0154

Nanomaterials: Removal processes and beneficial applications in treatment

2013· article· en· W2088895097 on OpenAlexaff
Glen R. Boyd, Mary Ellen Tuccillo, Anne Sandvig, Miguel Pelaez, Changseok Han, Dionysios D. Dionysiou

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Water Works Association · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Emergency Physicians
FundersUniversity of Cincinnati
KeywordsNanomaterialsWater treatmentNanotechnologyTitanium dioxideEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanomaterials are typically defined as particles with at least one dimension measuring < 100 nm. Limited information is currently available and more research is needed regarding the occurrence of these materials in source water and the effectiveness of water treatment processes at removing engineered nanomaterials. Engineered nanomaterials also offer opportunities for improving the operation and performance of drinking water treatment systems. Nanomaterials are currently being developed for the removal of trace organics and metals and for disinfection through application to membranes (nanomaterial‐enhanced or nanoreactive membranes), ion exchange, and sorption processes. Nanomaterials can remove contaminants of emerging concern by oxidation processes (e.g., titanium dioxide photocatalysis) and abiotic reduction (e.g., nanozerovalent iron). They are also being used in nanosensors for water quality monitoring. Ongoing development of nanomaterials is expected to continue contributing improvements to treatment systems with the potential for increasing the availability of safe drinking water supplies.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Water Works AssociationSame topicNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsFrench-language works237,207