Ozonation of Biologically Treated Landfill Leachate: Treatment Efficiency and Molecular Size Distribution Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A wide range of ozone doses were used to oxidise biologically treated Clover Bar landfill leachate, and results were compared to those of a previous study that involved aged raw leachate. The COD, BOD5 and colour of the leachate were measured prior to and after ozonation. The molecular size distribution of each sample was also analysed. At an ozone dose of 2.6 g l(-1), COD and colour removal efficiencies were 47% and 91%, respectively, while BOD5 increased by 324%. The BOD5/COD ratio increased from 0.02 prior to ozonation to approximately 0.2 following an ozone dose of 5.5 g l(-1), indicating improvement in the leachate biodegradability. Ozonation was very effective in reducing the concentration of organic compounds with molecular weights larger than 300 Dalton. After ozonation, no new peaks representing small molecules were observed. Relationships representing ozone dose, COD, BOD5, and the BOD5/COD ratio, as functions of total peak area of molecular size distribution, were determined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".