MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170849845 · doi:10.1680/jees.2013.0007

Membrane-based treatment for tanning wastewaters

2013· article· en· W2170849845 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Justina Catarino, Luís F.O. Silva, Ana Lança, Elsa Mendonça, Maria Norberta de Pinho, Ana Picado

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdvanced oxidation water treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWastewaterMicrofiltrationUltrafiltration (renal)Pulp and paper industryFiltration (mathematics)FlocculationMembraneMembrane technologyEnvironmental scienceSewage treatmentChemistryEcotoxicityPollutantWaste managementReverse osmosisEnvironmental chemistryChromatographyEnvironmental engineeringOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tanning wastewater was subjected to different unit operations to select the best treatment sequences. Textile membrane filtration (TMF), microfiltration (MF), and ultrafiltration (UF) were complemented by screening, flocculation or flotation operations. The general chemical characterization determined that the wastewater had a high organic load. The ecotoxicological study classified the wastewater as highly ecotoxic. The sequence of screening – TMF – UF was found to be the optimal treatment for wastewaters of the first and second soaking stages, while the sequence of screening – TMF – flotation – UF proved to be adequate for the liming wastewater concerning productivity and water quality. Larger pore sizes MF membrane or higher molecular weight cut off (MWCO) UF membranes with higher permeability to pure water showed lower permeation fluxes for tanning wastewater. After membrane treatments, a decrease in the ecotoxicity was measured. The use of membrane treatment technology showed to be promising in removing organic pollutants and allowing the reuse of water and chemicals in the process.

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 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 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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicAdvanced oxidation water treatmentFrench-language works237,207