Membrane concentrate management options: a comprehensive critical reviewA paper submitted to the Journal of Environmental Engineering and Science.
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
Membrane processes have become a competitive option to conventional treatment technologies because of the high quality of the product water. In particular, nanofiltration and reverse osmosis have been found to remove materials like natural organic matter, disinfection by-products, and endocrine-disrupting compounds. However, an issue identified as one of the major drawbacks for the adoption of pressure-driven membrane processes is the need for additional treatment of the concentrate stream. Few studies dealing with membrane concentrate treatment have been published. The majority of the published studies address the disposal of concentrate into receiving waters bodies and sewer systems. In this review paper, the characteristics of membrane concentrate in terms of water quality and their impact on receiving water bodies are discussed. In addition, several approaches to the removal of pollutants and disposal options for membrane concentrates are examined.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it