MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126095101 · doi:10.1080/09593330902753404

Analyses of particles in raw waters containing iron and organic carbon

2009· article· en· W2126095101 on OpenAlexaff
Beata Gorczyca, Corinne Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle sizeFiltration (mathematics)SettlingRaw waterGroundwaterSurface waterTotal organic carbonParticle-size distributionParticle (ecology)Suspension (topology)Water treatmentChemistryEnvironmental chemistryMaterials scienceEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many impurities in water supplies exist in the form of particles, which are removed in the water treatment process. In this study, the size of particles in raw water containing iron and organic carbon was measured. Methods for the separation of these particles from suspension were suggested based on the measured particle sizes. Samples from a groundwater and a surface water supply were analysed. The sizes of the particulates were measured with microscopes and particle counters. The groundwater studied contained about 7 mg L(-1) of iron and particles with a mean size of 7.8 microm. The particles in the surface water, with an iron content of 0.45 mg L(-1), were smaller with a mean size of 1.5 microm. The size of particles in surface water increased about eight times during quiescent settling; this increase of the particle size was not observed in the groundwater. The large size of the particles identified in the groundwater suggested direct filtration as the optimal method for their removal. Batch tests were completed with three types of filter media, preceded by oxidation with ozone. The effective size of the filter media used varied from 0.3 to 0.8 mm. In the filtration, 99-95% of the iron was removed, confirming that the particles formed in the groundwater after oxidation were large enough to be removed by direct 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental TechnologySame topicWater Treatment and DisinfectionFrench-language works237,207