MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102835075 · doi:10.5004/dwt.2009.108

Roles of various mixed liquor constituents in membrane filtration of activated sludge

2009· article· en· W2102835075 on OpenAlexafffund
Zuohong Geng, Eric R. Hall, Pierre R. Bérubé

Bibliographic record

VenueDesalination and Water Treatment · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryMembrane foulingFiltration (mathematics)MembraneChromatographyFoulingAdsorptionFraction (chemistry)Activated sludgeColloidChemical engineeringActivated carbonMembrane technologyWaste managementOrganic chemistrySewage treatmentBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The roles of various mixed liquor constituents in the membrane filtration of activated sludge were investigated. Bench-scale filtration tests with four mixed liquor fractions (whole mixed liquor, mixed liquor supernatant, filtrate I (<8.0 μm), and filtrate II (<0.45 μm) or the soluble fraction) were carried out at different permeate fluxes. It was found that due to its high contents of organic carbon compounds, macromolecules and small supra-dissolved particles, which were most likely to adsorb onto and/or clog in the membrane structure, the soluble fraction (<0.45 μm) of mixed liquor ranked first in terms of its contribution to the total mixed liquor fouling, followed by the colloidal fraction (0.45–8.0 μm) and the unsettleable microfloc fraction (>8.0 μm). In particular, the study revealed that large flocs were able to exert dual effects on membrane filtration. Depending on the hydrodynamic conditions, they could either act as membrane foulants causing fouling via particle deposition and cake formation, or serve as “moving filters” entrapping soluble and colloidal substances and thus alleviating the fouling. A “steric hindrance effect” mechanism was postulated to explain the positive effect of large sludge flocs on membrane filtration.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueDesalination and Water TreatmentSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207