Selective separation of copper (II) and cobalt (II) from wastewater by using continuous cross‐flow micellar‐enhanced ultrafiltration and surfactant recovery from metal micellar solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Performance of continuous cross‐flow micellar‐enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) method was investigated for the selective separation of copper (Cu 2+ ) and cobalt (Co 2+ ) from the aqueous phase using sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) as an anionic surfactant and iminodiacetic acid (IDA) as a chelating agent. Operating parameters such as operating time (10–120 min), cross‐flow rate (100–250 mL/min), pH of the solution (2.8–5.6), molar concentration ratio of the chelating agent to metals (the C/M ratio, 0.5–2.5), molar concentration ratio of the surfactant to metals (the S/M ratio, 5–8) and mode of operation were studied to investigate the effectiveness of the process on selective separation. At optimal parameters, above 90% selective separation (Cu 2+ in permeate and Co 2+ in retentate) was achieved. Two methods were studied for the separation of Co 2+ and SDS from retentate stream; acidification followed by UF and addition of chelating agent followed by UF with surfactant recovery of 75% and 83%, respectively, and Co going into the permeate.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".