MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Standardization of Methods for Fluence (UV Dose) Determination in Bench-Scale UV Experiments

2003· article· en· W2139303634 on OpenAlexaff
James R. Bolton, Karl G. Linden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Treatment and Disinfection
Canadian institutionsAlberta Environment and Protected Areas
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUltravioletProtocol (science)Environmental scienceStandardizationFluenceMaterials scienceIrradianceProcess engineeringComputer scienceOpticsOptoelectronicsPhysicsMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection is now an accepted technology for inactivation of a variety of waterborne pathogens in wastewater and drinking water. However, the techniques used in much of the previous research aimed at providing information on UV effectiveness have not yet been standardized. Thus in many peer reviewed published literature, it is not clear how the UV irradiations were carried out, nor how the average fluence (or UV dose) given to the microorganisms has been determined. A detailed protocol for the determination of the fluence (UV dose) in a bench scale UV apparatus containing UV lamps emitting either monochromatic or broadband UV light was developed. This protocol includes specifications for the construction of a bench scale UV testing apparatus, methods for determination of the average irradiance in the water, details on UV radiometry, and considerations for microbiological testing. Use of this protocol will aid in standardization of bench scale UV testing and provide increased confidence in data generated during such testing.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.275
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1,210
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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