Impact of activated sludge process configuration on removal of micropollutants and estrogenicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficacy of three different wastewater treatment configurations, conventional activated sludge (CAS), nitrifying activated sludge (NAS) and biological nutrient removal (BNR) for removal of selected micropollutants from authentic wastewater was investigated. The processes were also characterized based on their proficiency to reduce the estrogenic activity of the influent wastewater using the in vitro recombinant yeast assay. The removal efficiency of trimethoprim improved with the complexity of the three treatment process configurations. Ibuprofen, androstendione, sulfamethoxazole, nonyl-phenol, estrone and bisphenol-A had moderate to high removals (>65%) while carbamazepine and meprobamate remained recalcitrant in the three treatment process configurations. The removal of gemfibrozil was better in the NAS than in BNR and CAS treatment configurations. The yeast estrogen screen (YES) assay analyses showed an improvement in estrogenicity removal in the BNR and NAS treatment configurations as compared to the CAS treatment configuration. Comparing the estrogenic responses from the three treatment configurations, the removal efficiencies followed the order of BNR=NAS>CAS and all were greater than 81%.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".