MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289125507 · doi:10.1080/01496395.2015.1115068

Biosorption of Cr(VI) from aqueous solution using agricultural wastes, with artificial intelligence approach

2015· article· en· W2289125507 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeparation Science and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsChemistryBiosorptionAdsorptionAqueous solutionNuclear chemistryFreundlich equationLangmuirChromiumLangmuir adsorption modelIon exchangeKineticsFourier transform infrared spectroscopyIonChemical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solution by date-palm-leaves (DPL) and broad-bean-shoots (BBS) was investigated. FTIR, SEM, and EDAX showed that DPL has higher ability for ion-exchange to remove Cr(VI). Langmuir and Freundlich adsorption isotherms and kinetics revealed that DPL exhibited higher biosorption capacity. At Cr(VI) 100 mg/L, biosorbent-dose 5 g/L and 60 min contact-time, maximum Cr(VI) removal for DPL (98%) and BBS (95%) was achieved at pH 2 and 1, respectively. Adaptive-neuro fuzzy inference system determined the most important factor affecting Cr(VI) removal. The model indicated that DPL is more tolerant to pH levels, while BBS is a pH-sensitive adsorbent.

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)0.000
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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.234 · 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