MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129889212 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20486

Removal of strontium and barium from aqueous solutions by adsorption onto expanded perlite

2011· article· en· W2129889212 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meisam Torab‐Mostaedi, Ahad Ghaemi, Hamid Ghassabzadeh, Mohammad Ghannadi‐Maragheh

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdsorptionFreundlich equationAqueous solutionSorptionLangmuirLangmuir adsorption modelChemistryStrontiumBariumThermodynamicsInorganic chemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The adsorption of strontium and barium from aqueous solution onto expanded perlite (EP) has been investigated as a function of pH, contact time, adsorbent dosage, and temperature. Sorption experiments indicated that the sorption capacity was dependent on operating variables and the process was strongly pH‐dependent. Equilibrium isotherm data were analysed using Langmuir, Freundlich, and Dubinin–Radushkevich isotherm models. The adsorption was well described by Langmuir isotherm model. The maximum adsorption capacity was found to be 1.14 and 2.486 mg/g for Sr (II) and Ba (II) from the Langmuir isotherm model at 20°C, respectively. Two simplified kinetic models viz. pseudo‐first‐order and pseudo‐second‐order models were tested to describe the adsorption process. The kinetic data indicated that adsorption fitted well with the pseudo‐second‐order kinetic model. Using the equilibrium constant value obtained at four (20, 30, 40, and 50°C) different temperatures, the thermodynamic parameters of the adsorption (Δ G °, Δ H °, and Δ S °) were also determined. The results showed that the adsorption of Sr (II) and Ba (II) ions on EP was exothermic and spontaneous.

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 score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Citations81
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removalFrench-language works237,207