Heterotrophic Kinetic Parameter Estimation for Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal Processes Operated in Conventional and Membrane-Assisted Modes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Parameter estimation and wastewater characterization are crucial for modelling of the membrane enhanced biological phosphorus removal (MEBPR) process. Prior to determining the values of a subset of kinetic and stoichiometric parameters used in ASM No. 2 (ASM2), the carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus fractions of influent wastewater at the University of British Columbia (UBC) pilot plant were characterized. It was found that the UBC wastewater contained fractions of volatile acids (SA), readily fermentable biodegradable COD (SF) and slowly biodegradable COD (XS) that fell within the ASM2 default value ranges. The contents of soluble inert COD (SI) and particulate inert COD (XI) were somewhat higher than ASM2 default values. Mixed liquor samples from pilot-scale MEBPR and conventional enhanced biological phosphorus removal (CEBPR) processes operated under parallel conditions, were then analyzed experimentally to assess the impact of operation in a membrane-assisted mode on the growth yield (YH), decay coefficient (bH) and maximum specific growth rate of heterotrophic biomass (µH). The resulting values for YH, bH and µH were slightly lower for the MEBPR train than for the CEBPR train, but the differences were not statistically significant. It is suggested that MEBPR simulation using ASM2 could be accomplished satisfactorily using parameter values determined for a conventional biological phosphorus removal process, if MEBPR parameter values are not available.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".