MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155355929 · doi:10.1139/l2012-022

Effects of reduced aeration in a biological aerated filter

2012· article· en· W2155355929 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Rajan Ray, Paul Henshaw, Nihar Biswas

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAerationAirflowEffluentBiochemical oxygen demandFiltration (mathematics)Aerated lagoonEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringWastewaterChemical oxygen demandPulp and paper industryNitrateChemistryWaste managementActivated sludgeEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aeration is a major part of the operating cost in biological aerated filtration (BAF) systems for wastewater treatment. This study investigated the effect of reducing aeration at the City of Windsor’s Lou Romano Water Reclamation Plant to find the lowest possible airflow rate while maintaining a satisfactory ammonia and biological oxygen demand (BOD) in the BAF effluent. Profiles of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, BOD, ammonia and nitrate concentration were measured along the height of cell No. 7 at the plant, at different time intervals during filtration, at airflow rates varying from 1300 to 1700 m3/h per cell. This study found that the BOD and ammonium removal were satisfactory at the lowest airflow rate.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207