Plant-wide (BSM2) evaluation of reject water treatment with a SHARON-Anammox process
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) equipped with sludge digestion and dewatering systems, the reject water originating from these facilities contributes significantly to the nitrogen load of the activated sludge tanks, to which it is typically recycled. In this paper, the impact of reject water streams on the performance of a WWTP is assessed in a simulation study, using the Benchmark Simulation Model no. 2 (BSM2), that includes the processes describing sludge treatment and in this way allows for plant-wide evaluation. Comparison of performance of a WWTP without reject water with a WWTP where reject water is recycled to the primary clarifier, i.e. the BSM2 plant, shows that the ammonium load of the influent to the primary clarifier is 28% higher in the case of reject water recycling. This results in violation of the effluent total nitrogen limit. In order to relieve the main wastewater treatment plant, reject water treatment with a combined SHARON-Anammox process seems a promising option. The simulation results indicate that significant improvements of the effluent quality of the main wastewater treatment plant can be realized. An economic evaluation of the different scenarios is performed using an Operating Cost Index (OCI).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it