Evaluation and Source Apportionment of Heavy Metals (HMs) in Sewage Sludge of Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) in Shanxi, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heavy metals (HMs) in sewage sludge have become the crucial limiting factors for land use application. Samples were collected and analyzed from 32 waste water treatment plants (WWTPs) in the Shanxi Province, China. HM levels in sewage sludge were assessed. The multivariate statistical method principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to identify the sources of HMs in sewage sludge. HM pollution classes by geochemical accumulation index I(geo) and correlation analyses between HMs were also conducted. HMs were arranged in the following decreasing order of mean concentration: Zn > Cu > Cr > Pb > As > Hg > Cd; the maximum concentrations of all HMs were within the limit of maximum content permitted by Chinese discharge standard. I(geo) classes of HMs pollution in order from most polluted to least were: Cu and Hg pollution were the highest; Cd and Cr pollution were moderate; Zn, As and Pb pollution were the least. Sources of HM contamination in sewage sludge were identified as three components. The primary contaminant source accounting for 35.7% of the total variance was identified as smelting industry, coking plant and traffic sources; the second source accounting for 29.0% of the total variance was distinguished as household and water supply pollution; the smallest of the three sources accounting for 16.2% of the total variance was defined as special industries such as leather tanning, textile manufacturing and chemical processing industries. Source apportionment of HMs in sewage sludge can control HM contamination through suggesting improvements in government policies and industrial processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".