MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093807804 · doi:10.1021/ie701739g

Photocatalytic Inactivation of Airborne Bacteria in a Continuous-Flow Reactor

2008· article· en· W2093807804 on OpenAlexaff
Amrita Pal, Simo O. Pehkonen, Liya E. Yu, Madhumita B. Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational University of Singapore
KeywordsPhotocatalysisAerosolizationBatch reactorChemistryLight intensityBioaerosolEscherichia coliIntensity (physics)Relative humidityVolumetric flow rateContinuous reactorContinuous stirred-tank reactorResidence time (fluid dynamics)Nuclear chemistryAerosolCatalysisOrganic chemistryBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a continuous annular reactor was used to characterize the TiO 2 -mediated inactivation of an aerosolized Gram-negative bacterium, Escherichia coli K-12 (ATCC 10798), by varying UV-A intensity (0.5−3.4 mW/cm 2 ), relative humidity (RH) (from 51 ± 0.61 to 85 ± 4.7%), and photocatalyst loading (960 and 1516 mg/m 2 ) at an air flow rate of 1 L/min. Inactivation rate of E. coli K-12 increased with an increase in TiO 2 loading, UV-intensity, and RH. A UV-A dose of 0.03−0.204 J/cm 2 at an average UV-A intensity of 0.5−3.4 mW/cm 2, at a residence time of 1.1 min, is sufficient to fully and continuously inactivate E. coli K-12 passing through the reactor. The photocatalytic inactivation rates obtained in the continuous flow reactor compared well with our earlier batch inactivation rates conducted at a UV-A intensity of 0.015 mW/cm 2 and a TiO 2 loading of 1516 mg/m 2 . This demonstrates the possibility of scaling up of the photocatalytic inactivation process for bioaerosol based on batch kinetic data.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations48
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207