MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121011659 · doi:10.1139/s03-059

Water quality and disinfection impact of ClO<sub>2</sub> contamination by free chlorine: A case study

2004· article· en· W2121011659 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ron Hofmann, Robert C. Andrews, Georges Ranger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlorine dioxideChlorineChemistryChlorateHaloacetic acidsContaminationEnvironmental chemistryChloriteTrihalomethaneWater qualityInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bench-scale study was conducted using water from a drinking water treatment facility on Lake Ontario to investigate water quality and disinfection impacts of chlorine contamination in a chlorine dioxide solution applied for primary disinfection. Levels of chlorine contamination were varied between 0% (pure chlorine dioxide) and 20%, with a chlorine dioxide dose of 1 mg/L. The chlorine did not significantly affect the rate of chlorine dioxide decay in the water. The chlorine reduced chlorite formation, but led to a corresponding increase in chlorate formation. Trihalomethane and haloacetic acid concentrations varied with the amount of free chlorine present in the chlorine dioxide solution. Levels of Bacillus subtilis endospore inactivation were similar for solutions containing pure chlorine dioxide and a 20%:80% chlorine:chlorine dioxide mass ratio (for the same total chlorine concentration). Since chlorine alone has been reported to be very ineffective against these endospores, the results suggest that the disinfection effectiveness of the mixture was greater than the effectiveness predicted from each of the two disinfectants acting alone. Key words: chlorine dioxide, chlorine, disinfection, by-products, inactivation, drinking water.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.223
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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207