Performance evaluation, comparison and modeling of passive wastewater treatment systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this research were to evaluate and compare five configurations of wastewater treatment for on-site or communal applications in various climate conditions: a peat filter, a sand filter, a subsurface flow constructed wetland cell, a peat filter followed by a wetland cell, and a sand filter followed by a wetland cell. Oxygen demand, nitrogen and phosphorus compounds, temperature, and indicator bacteria of the influent and effluent of each treatment stage were monitored over a period of 17 months. The sand and peat filters achieved over 98% reduction in carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) to <1 mg/L (below detection limits) in most samples. The filters also reduced all indicator bacteria parameters to low levels. Phosphorus removal through the sand filter consistently exceeded 98% but declined rapidly after 14 months, likely due to saturation. Phosphorus reduction in the peat filter averaged 47% with an additional 58% provided by the wetland cell (total 78%);; no saturation trend was apparent by the 17th month. The total nitrogen reductions were low initially but improved over time in both filters. The wetland cell provided low to moderate treatment efficiencies for CBOD5(49%), phosphorus (33%), indicator bacteria (~2 log reduction), and total nitrogen (31%).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".