MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151436703 · doi:10.5539/ep.v2n1p96

Dairy Factory Wastewater from Cumulative Point of View–A Case Study

2012· article· en· W2151436703 on OpenAlex
Mehrfam Massah, Seyed Ahmad Mirbagheri

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Pollution · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIslamic Azad University
KeywordsWastewaterFactory (object-oriented programming)EffluentEnvironmental scienceMathematicsDairy industryEngineeringAgricultural scienceBiotechnologyPulp and paper industryEnvironmental engineeringFood scienceComputer scienceChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is needless to mention that, milk has the most appropriate and balanced combination among various foods that human feed on them daily and because of this fact milk is commonly called the perfect food. Therefore, milk and dairy products industries are one of the most important and necessary industries in all human societies. However, wastewater from this industry includes a variety of pollutants. The nature and combination of milk industry wastewater depends on the type of process being done on milk in factory and also type and combination of products that are produced in factory. In this study, the output effluent of a dairy factory was selected for investigation. Firstly, dairy wastewater specifications were introduced. Then, during 63 days, wastewater of plant was sampled ten times. Afterwards, temperature, nitrate, phosphate, BOD, COD, TSS, TDS, DO, pH, NH4, salt were measured by special devices and methods. Afterwards, by correlation analysis the impressibility of each parameter than the other variables was evaluated. The amount of these factors was compared with existing standard. Then, the correlation coefficient of these factors was evaluated by using SPSS software.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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