MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167557547 · doi:10.1139/a11-022

Biofiltration of methane and trace gases from landfills: A review

2012· review· en· W2167557547 on OpenAlex
Camille Ménard, Antonio Avalos Ramírez, Josiane Nikiema, Michèle Heitz

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandfill Environmental Impact Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut de Recherche et de Développement en AgroenvironnementUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsBiofilterMethaneBiogasLandfill gasEnvironmental scienceWaste managementCarbon dioxideEnvironmental chemistryMoistureEnvironmental engineeringPulp and paper industryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concerns about biogas from landfills are reviewed in terms of biogas generation, composition, and elimination. Biogas is mainly composed of methane and carbon dioxide but it also contains a few hundred non-methane organic compounds. The solutions available to reduce its harmful effects on the environment and on human health are valorization as electricity or heat, flaring, or biofiltration. The main parameters affecting the biofiltration of methane are reviewed: temperature, moisture content, properties of the packing material, nutrient supply, oxygen requirements, formation of exopolysaccharides, and gas residence time. An analysis is performed on the co-metabolic properties and the inhibition interactions of the methane-degrading bacteria, methanotrophs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.249 · 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