Removal of dimethyl phthalate from water by UV–H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to demonstrate the removal efficiency of dimethyl phthalate from water using the UV–H 2 O 2 photooxidation process. Pure water samples, spiked with 20 ppm dimethyl phthalate (DMP) were treated by the combined effect of UV photolysis as well as hydrogen peroxide oxidation mechanisms. In the experiments, the concentration of hydrogen peroxide was varied from 34 to 136 ppm and a low-pressure mercury UV lamp of 100 mW power output was used to provide the necessary radiation. The effects of initial concentration of H 2 O 2 , UV exposure time, pH, and temperature were investigated. The results showed that about 60% of DMP were removed directly by activation caused by UV light radiation intensity after an exposure time of 1 h. However, the removal efficiency increased when the DMP-spiked water was dosed with H 2 O 2 prior to irradiating with UV light (i.e., UV–H 2 O 2 ). More than 98% of DMP was removed after 45 min when the UV-irradiated solution was dosed with 136 ppm of H 2 O 2 . The results also showed that lowering the pH and increasing the temperature enhanced the removal of DMP by UV–H 2 O 2 process. Key words: ultraviolet light, hydrogen peroxide, hydroxyl radical, phthalates, UV–H 2 O 2 process, advanced oxidation processes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it